Richard Bentley's Letter on the Chronographia of John Malalas

- ^A -ing." Moreover, I shall not be unaware how bitter vindicators the gods and men once had of him who dared to bring forth the secret mysteries of the Mother of Eleusis; and knowing this, how could I not admit to a similar offense in my own case, if I should divulge this Orphic mystery, hitherto concealed in sacred silence? Nor is it so hidden from me, O most sweet Milli, how great a crime I take upon myself and my own by your impulse:

But yet your virtue, and the hoped-for delight, Of sweet friendship, persuades me to undergo any danger, And leads me to drag that horrible secret out Into the bright shores of light.

But you will be of good heart, and will spare your fear for my head and my age; when, that [monster] having been removed, and those putrid [interpretations] having been sent away to the devil, I have, as it were by *postliminium*, brought back the ancient and true reading to that place. It is this: Orpheus, he says, having been taught by the oracle, said that the names of God are *Metis, Phanes, Erikepaios*, which in common speech have this force and meaning: Counsel, Light, Life-giver.

Furthermore, there is no lack of wealthy and most certain authors to confirm that the Orphic god is called by these names. Damascius, in his ms. in the library of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, p. 156: "Now, in these Orphic rhapsodies that are current, the theology is indeed a certain one concerning the intelligible [cosmos], which even the philosophers interpret, positing 'Time' instead of the one principle of all things, and 'Aether' and 'Chaos' instead of the two, and instead of the 'One' simply accounting for the 'Being,' and making this a first triad. But in the second [triad] they complete it—or rather, the conceiving and the conceived—as 'Being', as God, or the 'Argus Tunic' or the 'Cloud,' because from these emerges Phanes. For at one time they philosophize about the mean as one thing, as the Intellect, and as Father and Power they conceive other things that have nothing to do with Orpheus—but as the third [they conceive] Metis, [or] Erikepaios, as Power, and Phanes himself as Father." The same author, p. 106: "Whence the sons of the Chaldeans acclaim it (the 'One') as the fountain of fountains, but Orpheus as the mixed 'Seed carrying the gods,' and the Phoenicians as the 'Cosmic Aeon', as having gathered everything into itself." ^B Orpheus, however, [says] "Metis, seed bearing the gods." But does not Orpheus also derive it from the 'One'? And when the Cloud is burst (the 'Argus' tunic or cloud), he becomes distinct: the precious Phanes, a procession. And he, having established it in his mind. ^C But it must be said in response to these things: the precious Phanes, a procession and he... "Whence leaps forth the creation of the multi-fountained matter," and all such things that the gods proclaim concerning that order; but also Orpheus [concerning] the precious [Phanes].

[To witness] those beholding within the Aether a light unhoped for, Such a light as the skin of the immortal Phanes shone forth.

He [Proclus] says that all things came to be for Zeus. Since at first, all things appeared—the causes of the adornments—in him in a unified way, but secondly in a distinct way in the Demiurge. And it seems to me that Plato also, having found this same god called both "Eros" and "Great Demon" in Orpheus, also loved such a hymn as this about Eros; for the Theologian says concerning the Intellect:

[4] Delicate Eros and reckless Metis... And again: Upon whose tracks the Great Demon ever treads. And concerning the intellectual Intellect and the unparticipated, And Metis the first begetter and Eros the much-delighting. And again: One power, one Great Demon came to be, the ruler of all things.

^D Much that is prudent and learned I pass over, which I could have brought forward from Athenagoras, Macrobius, the Orphic Hymns, and especially from Proclus on Plato's *Timaeus*; lest those who know me less should think that I am compiling the cabinets of Paul Leopardi. Those who desire to know more about these things can seek them there, or from Theodorus Canterus. For what should I think of the opinion of those who strive to carve the meaning of the faulty word *Erikepaios* out of the old-wives' trifles of the Cabbalists? But I do not wish to say anything unkindly. It is not for us to step upon those who are judged. I would even willingly grant indulgence if they have less perceived those things which for many centuries have escaped men, shrouded in fog and darkness. For although I grant that these things, as they have been amended by me, were conceived by John—which indeed I would not easily believe; yet the fact that this passage of Malalas was corrupted in the times of Suidas and Cedrenus is proved by the fact that they bring forth glosses merely from our own, concerning the words of Orpheus. But this I think I know with enough certainty: that you do not expect me to explain the force and nature of the word *Erikepaios*—unless you want me to pursue absurd and empty etymologies? An oath shall be given, that this could not have been done even by Orpheus himself. I wish to know first whence those vulgar things, Dionysus, [are].

Dionysus, it is said in Orpheus apud Macrobius, draws his origin from *dineisthai* (to revolve).

First he came into the light, Dionysus was he called, Because he revolves round the infinite and long Olympus.

This is

The Life-giver

Thus therefore I refashion the passage, which you have on p. 89: O King, son of Leto, far-shooting, mighty Phoebus, All-seeing, ruling over mortals and immortals, Helios, borne aloft on golden wings, The twelfth oracle I have heard from you, When you spoke, and you yourself, far-shooter, be my witness.

Third, but most similar and akin to the same writer, is another in the

Hymn to Protogonus

The passage on p. 92 is affected much more gravely; thus the poet’s words are not only confused and mixed up with the interpretations of Malalas, but are over and above beset and covered with errors. For Cedrenus certainly feared to describe those [lines], inasmuch as he did not understand them in any way at all. But I remember having seen certain Excerpta in the hand of Patrick Young from a certain Chronicle in the possession of the distinguished Mr. Selden: where, among other things of the same flour, these Orphic [verses] were held, corrupted and mutilated indeed; nevertheless, in them existed traces of the true reading: since it was written there "not by nothing, not by nothing." ^C Hence, concerning this passage, I have no doubt that it ought to be restored into lines according to this example: Wild beasts and birds [and] the sinful tribes of mortals, Images of the earth, fashioned [and] in no way [no] nothing Knowing, nor aware of coming evil, [6] Skilful, [but] neither to turn away [evil] from afar, Nor to turn [to what is good] and do it when it is present, Knowing [nothing], but in vain, ignorant, thoughtless.

I do not doubt to ascribe to this number of Orphics those things that exist on p. 50, although Malalas, Suidas, Cedrenus, the author of the *Chronicon Paschale*, and [one] of whom there is more later, attribute them to Hermes Trismegistus. ^D They are found in the Baroccianus. Truly, they are much more suitable than [the] authors [cited by] Saint Justin in his *Parænesis to the Greeks*, and Saint Cyril *Against Julian*, to whom they are referred: where you will also find the true text of this. For Malalas with his flock strictly maintain the ancient custom here, so that they understand nothing. But you will come very close to the words of John, if you read it thus: I adjure you, Heaven, O wise work of the great God, I adjure you, [by] the voice of the Father, which he uttered first, When he established the whole world by his will.

Those forged and fictitious oracles that you have, on pp. 42, 79, and 172, are so miserably and foully accepted, and the poetic words so changed into everyday language, that you will scarcely find the scattered limbs of the poet. Wherefore, I do not wish to waste my effort in collecting and restoring these fragments; especially since John himself quite openly confesses that he had changed those [things] that were written into common speech. But, that I may bring comfort to some with a much-desired messenger, there is a book written by hand at Oxford, I think, years ago; in which not a few oracles exist that are most german to these of Malalas; which, if I bring them all to light here, when there is a fair occasion, truly (which is in the Greek proverb) the pot may seem to have found its lid. I also hope that I shall earn some little favor from those men of most elegant judgment, who venerate the oracles that are commonly called Sibylline as if they were uttered by the fatidical old woman, the daughter of Noah. Come therefore, and touch these sacred things with clean hands.

[7]

THE ORACLES AND THEOLOGY OF THE GREEK PHILOSOPHERS

I.

Of Hermes the Great on the Almighty

II.

Of the same on the Trinity

III.

Prayer of the same

IV.

Of Aristotle

V.

Of Solon the Athenian

save to them that understand, for you who understand know that this One is the great flame which reaches through the heaven, whom the heavens, the earth, and the sea tremble at—self-fathered, fatherless, thrice-blessed. VI. Of Thucydides. The One is three and the three are one, bodiless and personal. I, the earth, have borne the begetter of heaven. ^B [8] VII. Of Chilon. The offspring descending from offspring fashioned fruitful water. The highest cause of all is conceived not in light and spirit, but as God and Lord and Father of all. VIII. Of Plutarch. The old is new, and the new is ancient; the father is the offspring, and the offspring is the father. IX. Of Antiochus of Colophon upon the Trinity. There was one Mind more intelligent than all; and if there is One from whom is the all-generating and intelligent Word, immortal always, the Son, the effulgence of the intelligent Father, one yet at the same time with the Father, one in name. And if it exist as from the Father, being one with the Father and from one, one is the order... Father... consubstantial, immortal always, with the first Holy Spirit, and the beginning of the seed.

[The Latin commentary discusses the difficulty of the verses attributed to Antimachus and the textual challenges of the passage, concluding that the verses were likely falsely ascribed, as Antimachus was a poet of art and craft, not of divine furor or inspiration.]

X. The inquiry of Jason, king of the Argonauts, to the Pythian Apollo. Prophesy to us, O prophet Titan, and that which follows; as Malalas has it, p. 94. XI. Of Plato. No mortal is capable of seeing the unseen mind. For the nature of God alone, as the cause of all, is able to see the naked soul; for one is the cause of all, one and from him another—or, as others read, "the one," and at no time was this One not in time; for the One is eternal and co-eternal. [10] XII. Of the same, concerning Christ. At some late time, one shall drive upon this manifold earth, and without fault flesh shall be, and by the tireless boundaries of divinity he shall release the corruption of incurable passions; and this shall become envy from an unbelieving people, and he shall be hung on high as a criminal, ^C having done everything. XIII. Oracle of Apollo given at Delphi concerning Christ. An heavenly light forces itself upon me, and the one who suffered is God, and it is not that Divinity itself suffered; for he is both mortal-bodied and immortal, God himself and man, bearing all things from the Father, and having all things of the Mother; from the Father having the power of life, and from the mortal Mother the cross, the tomb, and the insult of the relentless one, and from his eyelids he once poured forth warm tears, he who once fed the five thousand from five loaves; for the Immortal desires to suffer. Christ is my God, who was stretched upon the wood, he who was stretched ^D passed away; he who is from the tomb to many a heavy burden.

[The text provides a partially reconstructed metrical version of the preceding oracle, reflecting the same sentiments regarding the suffering God who is both mortal and immortal.]

XIV. Of Astanus concerning the Theotokos. Let us honor Mary, as having well hidden the mystery. [alt-version omitted]

^A Without doubt, it must be emended from Astanus. Ostanes the Magus and Zoroaster are known even to the unlearned. In his Preface to Astronomy, Theodore Meliteniotes does not call him Ostanes, but Otanis [11]. Which is perhaps the true spelling: for even among Herodotus’s Persians, Otanis is not just one; and indeed that Magus was a Chaldean by nationality. I shall describe the passage of Theodore, because there you may see the names of very many Magi, whom you would seek elsewhere in vain.

^B O the stupidity of the man, and pure ignorance! Among the author from whom the Antiochene drew this, without doubt it was written according to this example: "One is God." The foolish man, by a false punctuation, mangled the verse and miserably destroyed it. Indeed, he placed a distinction after "in truths," when the oration should have been supported after "One is God." But I shall ensure that henceforth these lines can proceed at least with a sound foot. Thus, therefore, I emend:

In truths, one is God Who fashioned sky and the far-flung earth, And the bright swell of the sea, and the force of the winds. We mortals, greatly wandering in our hearts, Set up for ourselves a solace for our pains, Images of gods from stone or bronze Or gold-wrought or ivory forms. And by making sacrifices and empty festivals to them, We think we are being pious.

^C These things are read in almost this way in Justin, Clement, Eusebius, Theodoret, and partly in Athenagoras; to such an extent that I marvel that the translator Chilmead, a man indeed most learned, should have seen less keenly than usual in so clear a light. But I will not hide from you, a thing I would wish to be said with the peace of the holy men, that I vehemently suspect these things are not by Sophocles. If you ask me why I bring this into my mind, I say: it seems very strange to me, beyond other things, that so illustrious a passage should have fallen into the eyes of the Ecclesiastical writers alone, and escaped the gaze of all others [13]. How did it happen that the diligence of Plutarch should have slumbered here? Who could pass over such an outstanding testimony against the abominable sacrifices of Serapis, as Theodoret says of this passage? Where were you, Stobaeus, lost in oblivion of letters? You, who have searched so many library coffers, and have studied the monuments of Sophocles and Euripides zealously above others. Are there so few among the Fathers—and what do I say of the Fathers? one single shadow-man who might have published a book under a feigned persona (as is the opinion of some, both ancient and modern, and not without cause)—who is more keen-sighted and diligent than all the rest? For Clement openly and ingenuously confesses that he followed the faith of Hecataeus, and ^D that he had not read Sophocles himself at all. "Sophocles," he says in *Stromateis* V, "makes history..." I mention this because I have certain knowledge that Justin and Clement took it from other Fathers, and that Justin and Clement handed it down on the authority of that fictitious Hecataeus. To which man, finally, and with what lack of faith, the matter returned, you see. Would he hesitate to attribute a few verses to Sophocles, he who published the very book under the feigned persona of Hecataeus by which he brought them in? Besides, the speech itself provides proof of itself. I do not recognize that "and much expense," as they say, used adverbially, to be the language of an Attic man, or to be tolerable in tragedy. For what kind of confusion of dialects would this be, and, as that fellow says, a "frying-pan of speech"?

"? ^A

It is proper, indeed, for one to be of a more cheerful mind, and to recover. Even children know this. He erred when he attempted to correct the fifth verse: "You would not speak of toiling" — for you cannot more fittingly say "toiling" (as it is a neuter verb) than you can say "I suffer" or "I am weary." Without doubt, it should have been written:

"As many as are weary with the bonds of mortals,"

or "As many as are wearied with bonds, O mortals."

He erred, finally, when he thought this passage should be referred to this Danae of whom we are speaking, which is altogether borrowed from the *Dictys* of Euripides, concerning which consult Stobaeus and others. Aristophanes the Grammarian in the argument to the *Medea* says: "It was produced under the archon Pythiodorus in the 87th Olympiad. First was Euphorion, second Sophocles, third Euripides. *Medea*, *Philoctetes*, *Dictys*, *The Harvestmen* (Theristae)." A Satyr play does not survive. *Dictys* and *The Harvestmen* are not preserved as satyr plays. *The Harvestmen* is a satyric drama. Do not believe that the word "Satyrs" is part of the inscription. Thus, the Sophoclean play is simply called by the Scholiast of Nicander, *The Mute Satyrs* (Kōphoi). Thus his *Trackers* (Ichneutae) are satyrs, just as at Pollux it is to be read *Trackers* instead of *Trackers of Satyrs*. Athenaeus, without adding the distinction of the play, says, "Sophocles in the *Trackers*." Thus Iophon in the *Aulōdoi* satyrs, as in Clement; thus Aeschylus in the *Kēryx* satyrs, as in Pollux: for so I correct the "herald satyric" (kēryxi satyrikois). Photius in his manuscript Lexicon says: "Torch-bearer lion" (Pyrsokoursoleontos), "fire-headed, yellow-haired." Read, as in Photius, for the text of Hesychius is to be restored from there. But when the name of some play is in the singular number, then they say "satyric" (satyrikē) and "satyr" (satyrikos). Grotius could have corrected his own error from that fragment of the *Danae* which Jerome Commelin, a man who merits the best from literature, first brought to light. There the characters of the drama are Mercury 16, Danae, the Nurse, Acrisius, Minerva, the Messenger, and the Chorus: but Dictys does not appear at all. In that fragment, it is commonly read not long from the beginning:

"...And when she once knew the secret marriage and did not know [indeed] She will bring forth a lion beneath a rock / for its father."

(Read "under-winged" [hypopteron] as "under-rock" [hypopetron]). Both the rationale of the meter and the thing itself demand that we write "under-rock," not "under-winged." Who has not read in books and seen in paintings Perseus with wings? But the interpreter, a truly merry fellow, thus translated it: "a lion born under a rock." Indeed, entrust this to him, if you wish anything to be managed correctly! And yet he himself is the one, if I am not mistaken, who wasted a good part of his life to bring out Suidas, a work overgrown everywhere with errors and stains, as we shall perhaps show at some time.

Page 51. Euripides of the *Bacchae* also... ^{B C D}

^A makes a false statement, as if it were from Pentheus. For it is not Pentheus, but Semele’s sisters, Ino and Autonoe, who said these insults to him. Bacchus in the prologue:

"Since the sisters of my mother, whom I least ought to have, Claimed Dionysus was not born of Zeus, And that Semele, having been bedded by some mortal, Attributed the sin of her bed to Zeus."

For the very wise Euripides poetically set forth a drama, as if Zeus committed adultery with Antiope in the form of a satyr. Being turned into a satyr, he committed the outrage. *Eukras, eukratos, eurybrotoisin.* It could not be *eukras* pleasantly, in *Antiope*. *Eukras, eukratos*. Euripides in *Antiope*: "It could not be *eukras* pleasantly for mortals." *Eukraes*, instead of *eukratas*. *Euchras*. ^B For the very wise Euripides poetically set forth a drama concerning Oedipus and Jocasta and the Sphinx.

And after Aeschylus, Alcmaeon reigned over them (the Athenians) for two years, concerning whom the very wise Euripides set forth a drama; and after Alcmaeon, others reigned over them for eighteen years. Where have your wits flown off to? *Alkmaion* or *Alkmaiona*? *Alcmaeon*, *Alcmaeon*.

"First, if you wish, consider the tragedians, How they benefit everyone; for the man who is poor, Having learned that Telephus became Even poorer than himself, now bears his poverty more easily; And the man who suffers madly, observed Alcmaeon. Tragedy is a blessed thing, ^C A poem in every way. If anyone again Mentions Alcmaeon, and the children Immediately say that, having gone mad, he killed His mother."

Alcmaeon the one "by Psophis." ...disposed. *Argainein*, to whiten. Euripides in *Alcmaeon*: "whitening, whitening, wandering." Euripides in *Alcmaeon by Psophis*: "whitening, whitening, shining." And from "argainein" in Euripides in *Alcmaeon*. ...bulls in Pindar, and "argainein" for whitening... nothing sound. *Atenes*. "I come *atenes* from home." Euripides in *Alcmaeon by Psophis*: "strained." Euripides in *Alcmaeon by Psophis*: "strained." *Atenes*, strained. Alcmaeon the one by Psophis.

Alcmaeon was pursued by the Erinys of his mother’s murder, and having gone mad, he arrived first in Arcadia to Oicles, and from there to Psophis to Phegeus; and having been purified by him, he married Arsinoe, his daughter. Psophis ^D...

Page 58. I think this should be supplied [in the text]. It happened because of the similarity of two words, as is wont to happen, that the scribe omitted one. Furthermore, the *Antiopa* fable is mentioned by Hesychius, Stobaeus, and others. Photius the patriarch in his manuscript Lexicon: [read]... Suidas: write [as it is] correctly in the *Etymologicon Magnum*. Pacuvius taught the *Antiope* in Latin, translated from the Greek of Euripides [17], as Charisius, Diomedes, Servius, and Marcellus cite. Concerning which, Cicero says in *De Finibus*: "I wonder why they are not delighted by their native speech in the most serious matters, since they willingly read Latin plays translated word for word from the Greek." For who is so inimical to the Roman name, who would spurn or reject Pacuvius’s *Medea* or *Antiope*? Who would say he is delighted by these same plays of Euripides, yet hate the Latin ones? You know that line of Persius:

"There are those whom Pacuvius and wart-covered *Antiope* delay, With heart upheld by sorrows that evoke tears."

Page 63. Oedipus and Jocasta are called to parts in the *Phoenissae*: indeed, mention is made of the Sphinx there more than once. The Antiochian [Malalas] could therefore have been looking at the *Phoenissae*, or at the *Oedipus* play, which is praised by Hesychius, by Stobaeus several times, and by Erotian.

Page 88. "I beg you, Syriscus, are you saying this seriously or jokingly? For what ghosts and madnesses were agitating you when you were writing these things?" Those are the words of a mule, not a man. It is a similar error that you deem that a tragedy was composed about the Athenian Alcmaeon. Since he is the Argive Alcmaeon, son of Amphiaraus, who, because he had killed his mother Eriphyle, was driven by the furies. From there the argument of the scene was taken. Timocles the Comic poet: Antiphanes...

Cicero [18] *Acad. 2*: "What? Even your Alcmaeon, who denies that his heart agrees with his eyes, is he not there in a burst of fury: 'Whence does this flame arise?' and what follows, 'Move on, move on; they are near, they are near; they seek me, they seek me.' What, when he implores the virgin’s faith? 'Bring me aid; drive this plague from me; this flame-bearing force that tortures me. They advance girded by a sea-colored snake; they stand around with burning torches.'" But it is truly tiresome to use witnesses in a most certain matter. I think that to your ears, Milli, [it is clear that] there is a new [inscription], unless perhaps Euripides published a twin *Alcmaeon*, or the same one again, corrected, that is, and... whatever this is, our Hesychius taught even me alone, and perhaps only me: others, who could not understand his corrupted words, did not. I think it should be corrected: then a mark of punctuation should be placed †. ...aition, says Eustathius on the second *Odyssey*, and *argainein*... Whether Eustathius took these things from Hesychius or from some other person, it appears that this passage has been corrupted for many centuries already. For how else could it have happened that Eustathius brought forth the name of a tragedy [that is] mutilated, unless he saw in the following words *ouden ygies* (nothing sound). The same Hesychius: *Atenes*. "I come *atenes* from home." Euripides in *Alcmaeon by Psophis*: *synteinasa* (strained). Correct, if you please, in this manner: [it] means "straining with the utmost exertion of strength." Examples of this meaning, because they are not found rashly, the place of the word has been indicated by the grammarians [as being] in *Alcmaeon by Psophis*. Furthermore, he who has kept in mind Alcmaeon, whom the scourges of entwined snakes and burning torches did not allow to stand still, [and who] at last returned to a sound mind in Psophis of Arcadia, would not seek the reason for this title for long nor in vain. See Pausanias in his *Arcadica*. [19] Apollodorus, lib. III. I have already warned that it should be amended... with the second syllable long. Ovid:

"As far as Orchomenos, and Psophis, and Cyllene."

But this passage of Apollodorus very conveniently brings to my mind another, in the first book: which has led learned men into error until now: then...

^A it must be corrected, as it is from this passage of Photius, and from the Medea of Euripides, which at the end of the play thus insults Jason: "Who among gods or spirits hears your perjury and violation of guests?" and Aristophanes in the Wasps: If any of you, O spectators, seeing my nature, Then wonders to see me contracted in the middle, What is the sense of this sting to us... Tudeus, as he who wrote the Alcmaeonid says, having killed the sons of Melas who were plotting against Oeneus, Phineus...

OF THE CHRONOGRAPHY OF JOHN MALALAS

^A they are led away, and the scenes are placed in locations far distant and most diverse. There you see Icarus and Pasiphae: in the *Cretans*, [you see] Aerope, Atreus, Thyestes. Here the events take place in the Argos of the Peloponnese; there, on the island of Crete. Aristophanes in the *Wasps*: "But Hades will decide before I am persuaded." Where the scholiast says: "In the *Cretans*, of Euripides, Atreus will decide these things against Aerope." Whence it is clear that in the former passage it must be corrected: "Aerope in the *Cretans*." Porphyry in book IV of *On Abstinence*: It almost escaped me to quote Euripides, who says that the prophets of Zeus in Crete abstain [from meat] through these things. The chorus says to Minos: Phoenix-born child of the Tyrian, Offspring of Europa and great Zeus, ruling Over Crete of the hundred cities, I have come, leaving the holy temples, Which the naturally grown oak, having been hewn, Provides, covered with steel axe, And joined with bull-hide To the true joints of cypress... And what follows. Grotius in [24] *Excerpts from Greek Comedies and Tragedies* has attempted to amend this passage. The scholars of Cambridge have followed his authority in the newest edition of Porphyry. “Erotion says that this fragment of Euripides (these are the words of Grotius) survives as it is currently read. But it is easily understood to be from the *Cretans*, because the words are of the chorus to Minos.” But he erred in a light matter, as he is engaged, I believe, in more weightier studies, a man placed far beyond our comparison and emulation. For since, as I have already taught, in the *Cretans* Atreus and Aerope speak, and the scene is indisputably Argos, it is with difficulty or in no way possible that these Porphyrian [lines] seem to be taken from the same drama. But if they are, I truly wonder why Minos should establish a conversation with these priests in Crete. For what are these illusions? By what machinations are these things carried "up and down"? Is there the same history in the play? Is there a double scene, and a twin chorus? Shall we look now at Crete, now at the palace of Atreus? Now a male chorus, the Mystae, I mean, of the Idaean Zeus, now a group of women entering the parts? From this, indeed, the play received the name *Cretan Women* (Cressae), because in it the chorus is of Cretan women, namely those who accompanied Aerope from Crete. For a similar reason many others are named by their own terms. Yet, because the chorus is Cretan, it is not therefore necessary that the scene be set in Crete: since in the *Phoenissae* (Phoenician Women), the events are acted out in Thebes, yet the chorus is constituted of Tyrian women: "I came having left the Tyrian swell, the first fruits for Loxias from the Phoenician isle." But why do we prevaricate? We know that Aerope was the daughter of Catreus, the granddaughter of Minos; and at the time these matters were transacted, she had already long since conceived children. For they relate that Agamemnon and Menelaus were privy to their father [Atreus] when he served that deadly banquet to Thyestes. No ^D

^A regarding Minos, their ancestor, is there a long-standing doubt, as to whether he had not already departed from the number of the living a long time before. Indeed, he was slain by the daughters of Cocalus, if Eusebius is to be believed, about three years prior; but, according to the most exact calculation of William Lloyd, Bishop of St. Asaph, 25 *Andros, which it is not right even for the wicked to praise*, he died four and twenty full years before Atreus seized the kingdom. For which reason I do not easily endure that those corrupt words of Erotian, *Euripides in the Cres*, should be more and more corrupted by Grotius: but, as for the common reading, I would dare to be the authority that thereafter it be corrected to *in the Cretes*. Thus the whole will be simple and one, everything will be consistent, and they will fit together beautifully: Minos, the chorus of the initiated, Pasiphae, Icarus. There will be no need to *weave what is non-woven*. It remains that we should discuss accurately, as much as lies within our power, and exquisitely, the reading of this passage of Porphyry, which is faulty in truly strange ways:

*I come, leaving behind the holy temples,* *Which the native oak, being cloven,* *Provides as roofs for the Chalybian axe,* *And joined by a bull-hide thong* *To the exact joints of the cypress.*

Which the distinguished Grotius translates thus:

*Sacred I arrive, leaving the temples:* *Which the native tree [has given as] houses,* *A Chalybian axe having cut it,* *And joining to itself by bull-glue* *From the true wood the cypress.*

^B The verse *which the native tree has given as houses* has a tribrach in the place of an anapaest, or any foot of four times. This is a common vice of Grotius with Jos. Scaliger, Flor. Christianus, and, I believe, all others who in this century and the last either translated Greek tragedies into Latin or wrote new ones themselves: to whom it is customary to end their anapaests anywhere—where there is no punctuation or break—with a tribrach or a trochee or a cretic; or even to end with a vowel, or a letter M, when the next verse begins with another vowel or an H. For they assumed, here as elsewhere, that the final syllable in the verse was common. Indeed, these men, if they had published their stories of old while Greek or Roman affairs still stood, would have been hissed and *driven off the stage*. For no such license was permitted to the Greeks.

^C No indulgence is granted to unworthy poets by the Romans either. It was permitted only for that verse which is called the paroemiac to close with a trochee. Up to that point, anapaests or feet equal to an anapaest had to be continued just as if it were a single verse. Furthermore, Seneca the tragedian, so that you may know he tempered it by design, only once or twice closed his anapaests with a trochee, and never except when the sentence was finished: which, naturally, was the place of the paroemiac, unless that writer, I know not why, had rejected that verse. Nevertheless, that the ancient Latins did not at all disdain the paroemiac, but rather followed in the footsteps of the Greeks, will be known from these remaining verses, and those, if I am not mistaken, alone.

Attius in the *Phinidae*: *Simul et circum magna sonantibus* 27 *Excita saxis sæva sonando* *Crepitu clangente cachinnant.*

The passage is in Nonius under *cachinnare*. But no one will prevail upon me to concede that the words of Attius are sound. For to what do *magna sæva* pertain, and *sonantibus sonando*? I shall be sinning, I hope, within the bounds of forgiveness if I attempt an unsuccessful cure. From the very name of the play, there is great suspicion that the words are spoken about the Harpies. Therefore, am I mistaken, or should it be read thus: *Simul et circum stagna sonantibus* *Excita saxis sæva Celano* *Crepitu clangente cachinnat.*

^D That [word] *clangente* is spoken properly and aptly of the Harpies. Virgil: *At subita horrifico lapsu de montibus adsunt* *Harpyiæ, et magnis quatiunt clangoribus alas.*

Moreover, I have well replaced *stagna*, with Virgil there approving: *Obscenas pelagi ferro fœdare volucres.*

Attius in the *Telephus*: *Jamjam stupido Thessala somno* *Pectora languentque senemque.*

Attius in *Eurysaces*: *Over high pools of my father Ocean,* *I shall revisit the curves of the lands.*

Pacuvius in *Niptra*: *Cover me, depart, now* *Send me away: for by touching and shaking* *You have amplified my savage pain.*

Attius in *Philocteta*: *Alas, who is it that commits to the salt waves* *Me from the high summit of the rock?* *Now I am consumed: the violence of the bird,* *The heat of the ulcer, wears my soul away.*

The same in Cicero, *Tusculans* 2: "Whence shines the fire stolen secretly from the gods? the learned man [Prometheus] is said to have stolen it by guile and to have paid the penalty to supreme Jove." This passage must be reduced to its anapests as follows: *Whence he who is too learned in the crafts of the immortals* *Prometheus [28] stolen by guile, and the penalty to Jove* *For the theft, he paid to the supreme one.*

^B But wishing to return to Porphyry; I should certainly like to know, on whose authority the renowned man received *taurodetro crathesa* concerning "gluing." For *cratheisa*, unless I am entirely mistaken, means mixed and tempered, not joined and compacted; *taurodetron* however, as I said at the beginning, is plain barbarism. Indeed, I find *taurodetos* nowhere else; and I do not understand how it can be fittingly said. As *alysidetos* is "bound with chains," *kerodetos* "with wax," and whatever others there may be: so *taurodetos* would be "bound to a bull" [compacted with a bull, not with bull-glue]. For who, I ask, used *tauron* in place of *taurokollas*? I suspect, however, from where those things may have crept into the codices of Porphyry and Erotian. It does not seem to have been done rashly: thus this matter sticks fast; nor can I readily unravel it. Yet, so that I do not enter into this argument as ^C an *asymbolos* (a person without a contribution), until something better occurs, I propose that *taurodeto* be removed from the middle (since without it the sentence is complete, *to kollethesa harmas*, shadowed, as it seems, from that Homeric passage: *I fitted doors skillfully joined together*). And in this way this anapestic basis, namely the verse that precedes the paroemiac, will be a monometer acatalectic; as is indeed usually the case, and in this very place more than once. But the other parts should be read as follows: *Leaving behind the holy temples of Hecate,* *For which the native, having been cut,* *Provides planks for the Chalybian axe,* *And glued with Truth, [there stands] the cypress chariot.* *I arrive from the holy temples, to which* *The native cypress is accustomed* *To provide beams, cut by the steel* *Of the Chalybes, and the tight* *Joinings bound with glue.*

Elsewhere the *o panu* (the learned one) had his mind too occupied when he invented that *dry-s*. For why should [the cypress] be called *autigene*? What? Is it not elsewhere so fre- ^D quently born in Crete? But I, as soon as I recognized that word with my eyes, immediately realized that *kyparissos* was written by the poet, not *kyparissou*. For I remembered it to be truly *authigene*, and the Cretan one therefore to be called by Plutarch: "Either the Isthmian pine or the Cretan cypress"; just as also the Idaean [29] by Nicander and Virgil: *Seeds of the Bupleurum and of the Idaean cypress.* [Nor willow nor lotus nor Idaean cypresses].

Pliny 16.33, speaking of the cypress, says: Its native land is the island of Crete: although Cato calls it Tarentine, I believe because it arrived there first: and in Aenaria it sprouts again when cut down. Truly by a similar transfer, which Euripides calls indigenous to Crete, Pliny commemorates that Crete is its native land. But in his words there is a most foul blemish, although not very *dys-ek-lytos*. For *earia* should be read *Tarra* without much change. Since this explains Book II of Theophrastus' *Hist.* c. 2: "The cypress is produced elsewhere from seed, but in Crete also from the trunk, just as from the *koura* in Tarra; for among them is that which is called the *kouri-zoumene* cypress." For me this is certainly more sure than those things which are at Sagra. But because I see that this is with difficulty and reluctantly persuaded to some, let us bring forward the *peithanagken* (persuasive necessity) from Solinus, *Thettaliken*, so that on the contrary, if anyone feels otherwise, he feels nothing. His words are in chapter 17: "The indulgence of the Cretan soil is wonderful: the arborous yields are abundant: for only in a part of this island do the cut cypresses grow again." Indeed, either Solinus read Tarra in his Pliny, or he thought that Aenaria was a part of Crete. Which I previously counted in chapter 7 among the Italian islands? He must be of iron face who would say this. But who believes that cypresses grow spontaneously in Aenaria? Has anyone recorded this in memory? No more, by Hercules, than the Silphium of Battus or the golden apples of the Hesperides. But even so that we may proceed further, I judge that Solinus himself is not in every part sound. For I strongly suspect that it was written in ancient times: *For in Tarra, a part of this island, they sprout again*: Or, *In the Tarra of this island only do they sprout again.* For I do not depart too far from the vulgate reading: nor can I find a probable cause why he would abstain from naming that part of the island by its own name. I would even say, if I were of a mind to guess, that the similarity of the words imposed [a mistake] on Cato, when he called the cypress Tarentine. Since there is a city of Crete called Tarra, but Tarentum is called *Taras*. Indeed wool, and purple, honey, salt [30], olive oil, wax, leek, venus mussels, oysters, nuts, chestnuts, Tarentine figs I have noted were in value: but yield me one Tarentine cypress, who has praised it above others, besides Cato. But consider this said by the way, and more in jest, than that I am of that opinion. Now, as to the fact that Euripides calls that tree...

^A of the longest duration and most uncorrupted; and from Egypt hanging sails and papyri, and from Syria again frankincense. And beautiful Crete holds the cypress for the gods. Of these, the cypress wood seems to be of the longest duration. At any rate, in Ephesus, from which the doors of the temple were stored away, it lay for four generations. And it is the only one that receives a polish; does it commit a solecism? for the saying of those in Ephesus, from which the doors of the temple were stored away, it lay for four generations. One man does not see everything. ^B Hippolytus the second, which survives today, is inscribed with the title Stephanephoros; the prior one is called Kalyptomenos. Pollux, ix, c. 5: Euripides in the Kalyptomenos... having immediately rushed toward the horses.... Nor, however, were the plays entirely different, as with Iphigenia in Aulis and in Tauris, Oedipus Tyrannus and in Colonus, Prometheus Bound and Unbound. Scarcely, or rather not even scarcely, can this happen, since the later drama embraces the entire matter as it occurred, from the time when Phaedra first conceived love for her stepson, down to the death of Hippolytus: certain things are also cited from the earlier one, which you might find in the other as well. Because I am most persuaded that it was for this reason that it was written as Kalyptomenos, because in the final part of the play the dying Hippolytus speaks thus: ^C My troubles are endured; for I am undone, O father, / Cover my face, as quickly as may be, with cloaks. Hence, these verses were found in both plays. Similarly, the other name was given to it, because of these words of Hippolytus not far from the beginning: This woven garland from an unmown meadow, O mistress, I bear, having adorned it. Therefore, the Hippolytus was not a new play, but merely correct ed, and interpolated, a reworking of the former. The ancient grammarian in the argument of the Hippolytus: "This is the second Hippolytus, also called the Stephanephoros." And it is evident that it was written later; for the indecorous and blameworthy elements have been corrected in this play. Who does not know what a reworking is, may consult Casaubon on Athenaeus. I do not arrange his writing-cases; but I shall take care to amend the passage of Hesychius, which I suspect neither he nor anyone else has understood. Read the passage, whose meaning is this: Magnes, a writer of the old comedy, taught a play during the time that those survived, at the time when the grammarian who first said these things was alive; but they were recalled under a new file and polished with a new file. Photius the patriarch: read as in Hesychius. Suidas should also be corrected, who has it without interpretation. The same Hesychius: he speaks of the months of Magnes, the Phynes of Magnes. Read Phynes. These things knowing what Magnes suffered along with the many [descending, / Who set up most trophies of victory for his rivals’ choruses, / Sending forth all voices to you, both singing and feathering, / And Lydizing and Phynizing and being dipped in frogs. ^D By these words the play of Magnes is indicated, or Barbitidai, Birds, Lydians, Phynes, and the Frogs. Consider, however, what peace between Hesychius

^A and an anonymous writer [regarding comedy] can be established: for the latter says that all the writings of Magnes have perished, and nothing is saved. Magnes the Athenian, having competed at Athens, won eleven victories, but none of his plays are saved; those that are cited are nine.

It is not for us to settle such great disputes between them.

Pag. 148. [33] *For the wise Euripides brought forth a drama concerning the Cyclops, because he had three eyes, signifying the three brothers*, and what follows in order. What a man! Could Euripides have said this even in his dreams? Well done, that the Cyclops even now survives. But if you find that the matter stands as John relates: I do not deny, what you might think would be a most grievous punishment, that I should have to spend all my life, nights and days, reading and learning these Volusian Annals — Malalas, I meant to say.

Pag. 210. *For the wise Euripides brought forth a drama concerning the same Meleager.* Macrobius, Stobaeus, the scholiast of Pindar and others make mention of the Meleager fable. Attius translated it into Latin. Hesychius: I read, *[I] shall strike [through], I shall loose, I shall set straight*. The other word cannot be healed otherwise than by an erasure. For the first time it was written ^B erroneously *I shall loose* [as later corrupted] or some studious reader or a librarian a little more learned, in the margin of the book or in the middle perhaps between the lines, had provided the true emendation *I shall strike through*. Finally, it happens that both words were written conjunctively in the verse and context. By this reasoning, indeed, errors have not rarely occurred both in other writers and especially in the lexicographers. Since these mistakes are not for everyone to detect; we must certainly confirm our opinion with some examples, lest we appear to have displaced anything rashly and unadvisedly. *I shall take*. The latter word must be thrown out: for the same Hesychius says it means *to cast*. "Desirable, beautiful land, easily ploughed, fertile." The latter part comes from some emendator; who had ineptly corrected the first corrupted part. Therefore, the whole passage must be set up thus: I know as surely that the last word is from some corrector, as I know that I live. There is no doubt that Hesychius wrote thus: As the word comes hither after *Antiphitos*, one knows that the author wrote in the series of letters thus: *Anti, [if we should come to] anything, we withstand*. Afterwards someone, who detected the error, emended it, by placing *above*. We all know this is usually the case. But an inept librarian at last has made the continuation of both words, which we see today. *Exlytrine*, *Exlyrison*, *cover*. This *Exlyrison* is from the same workshop of correctors. Hesychius wrote *Exlytrison*, which as the order of letters testifies is for *cover*. For "Media" go between *Exlytos* and *Exlopizei*. This a foolish little critic (who indeed has understood what has never once been heard, not even in common parlance?) not understanding, has attempted to amend from the verb *to play the lyre*. But, by Hercules, *an ass to a lyre*. For ^C *to play the lyre* and *to cover* differ in meaning, as far as the Hypanis is distant from the Venetian Eridanus.

Indeed, a foul and most wicked ulcer lies hidden, which, unless it is first lanced by a judgment upon Hesychius, one denies can be brought to health. Since, blushing at the error, he set down *Exlytrison* for *Exlytrōson*, which you would most correctly interpret as *cover*. Hesychius himself: *In coverings, in shelters*. *Elytra properly means wrappings or covers*. *Elytron, skin, case, husk, wrapping, cover, shelter*. Hence *to be covered* in Hippocrates, and *to cover with an involucrum* in Athenaeus: likewise *exelytrōsai*, to strip, to loosen from integuments. Hesychius: *Exelytrōsas, thou hast stripped*. Is this not certain and explored, my most pleasant friend? But indeed, someone here may exclaim: O confident and rash young man! Do you dare to suspect that Hesychius, the most learned of grammarians, was of such ignorance that he would write *Exlytrison*; unless he had read that word somewhere, perhaps in authors whom the long day and excessive antiquity have withdrawn from our notice? Come now, and deny that front/courage has perished from things. Yet, I pray you, appease your passion, whoever you are: and repress yourself for a while, while I bring forward some other things, which will compel you yourself, whether you will or no, to pass over to our opinion. For while he rakes together from ancient scholiasts, grammarians, and lexicons, which were not arranged 35 alphabetically, words from every side, with which he may replenish and stuff his [conthesaurus]: it often comes to pass by usage that he is led into error by unskilled librarians, who have written inaccurately, or by their likes, [the word-gatherers]: and he thrusts upon his readers things which are nowhere in the world either read or heard. See this, if you will. ^D You will read this in its place under the letter Delta. I indeed declare to you that these are mere trifles: for it should have been written *Eledōnē, an odorous fish*. It is a fish of the genus of polyps; which Aristotle, Athenaeus, and others mention. The same Hesychius: Thus these passages must be emended. I, however, seem to see what gave an opening for error to Hesychius. Doubtless, in his author it was written *Eledōnē* or *miara* [filthy] *Eledōnē* or something similar: that poor man, since in his age books lacked signs of accent, fashioned it into the fish *deledōnē*, such as neither Nereus, nor Neptune, nor Father Ocean himself would recognize. See another one here, genuine and German [authentic]. *It is drawn in/restrained*. No one, I suppose, will deny that it was so written, without

^A any sound reason. *Artemē*, health. ^B *Artemi*, safe, healthy, temperate. *Artemea*, health (read *hygia*), healthy. *Arteles* (correct to *Artemes*), healthy [37]. *...nesteran*, healthier, more honorable. *Artimesteran* for *Artemesteran*. *...timesteran* for *Timēsteran*. *Atisilinoīs*, regarding the binding of flaxen threads. *Apsisi linou*. *Apsisi linou*, knots from the joining. Does it not seem a riddle to you? Indeed, I am no Oedipus: yet I dare to promise with certainty that the correct reading is *Apsisi linou*. Hesychius elsewhere: *Apsisi linou*, knots from the joining. Homer in the fifth book of the Iliad: *“Lest, caught in flaxen threads, a snare for all, / You become a prize and booty to hostile men.”* *Aristērai*, female slaves. *Aristērai*. *Drēstērai*, ministers, maidservants; *Drēstērai*. *Drēsteirai*: *“Ten are the maidservants who work in your house.”* ^C For I shall not hesitate to say with frankness that, having made an abundance of definitions from Aristarchus and Apion and Heliodorus, and having added the books of Diogenianus—which is the first and greatest advantage—these things I myself wrote with my own hand with every correctness and the most accurate spelling according to the grammarian Herodian. I myself, who read the manuscript compendium of Theodosius of the *Universal* by Herodian, testify that this promise was in no way satisfied. *Arēsthoren*, leaped. *Arēsthoren*, leaped. *“And the glorious Hector leaped forth / Equal in appearance to the swift night.”* *Arēnoboskos*, shepherd of sheep. Miraculously indeed, so that nothing is above it. And yet *arēn arēnos*, I think, is said, not *arēnos*; whence *polyrrhēnes* (rich in sheep), and *dīs hyporrhēnos* (having double sheep). No, since the beginning of the iambics was in Sophocles… ^D there is no room to doubt, indeed.

^A Melius ipse alibi: *Arēnboskos*, *probaboskos*. And it is also written *errhēnoboskos* through the letters *e* and the double *p*. Etymologicum Magnum: *Errhēnoboskos*, the shepherd of sheep in the *Tyro* of Sophocles, fragment 2. † *Emphērous* and *Emphēroi* is a fault of the exemplar. Ipse alibi emendate: *Emmērous*, being in wardship, alongside the hostages given by treaty. *Emmērous*, Demetrius in *Sicily*. *Lacedaemonians of ours tore down the walls,* *And captured the triremes, the Emmērous, so that* *The Peloponnesians might no longer rule the sea.* Demetrius the comic poet in the play entitled *Sicily*. † *Chōronomein*, to be angry. *Cheironomein*, to dance. *Cheironomos*, a dancer. I have other six hundred [corrections], which I concede on this occasion. But, by Hercules, if ever there is a need for the new edition of Hesychius to be procured—a work which, although it often falls into shameful errors, is nevertheless most useful and nearly necessary for all who aim at the path of true scholarship: ^B I can promise you plainly, Milli, that I can correct five thousand more or less errors, if I choose, which have hitherto eluded the laborious diligence of others. But let me return to where I left off: in many places the Lexicons have been contaminated by those corrections in the margins of the books: because from that time when a faulty word was joined continuously with another in a verse, instead of being removed by an erasure as it ought to have been done, the error remained. A clear example of this matter exists in Julius Pollux, lib. vii, cap. 55, where among various names of throws in the dice game, there are named the *artia* and *armatiai*, *antiteuchos* and *antitypos*, *epimenon* and *epipherōn*. But from these pairs, only single items proceeded from Pollux, and the others, as I have said, insinuated themselves into the speech by another way. To which opinion he will not unwillingly accede who has already learned from me that the iambics are trimeters from the play *Aletorides* of Eubulus. The passage should be constituted by this example. ^C *But Midas was also one of the middle 'throws'.* And there are many others, whom Eubulus names in the *Kybeutai*: *Centrōtos, hieros, arm' hyperballōn podas,* *Kērynos, eudaimōn, kynōtos, artia,* *Lākōnes, antiteuchos, argeios, daknōn,* *Timokritos, elleipōn, pyalitēs, epithetos,* *Sphallōn, agyrtēs, oistros, anakamptōn, dou-* *reus, Lampōn, kyklōpēs, epipherōn, solōn, simōn.* Joannes Meursius erred on the whole matter through ignorance of these verses, as he lists them all among the middle "throws." For these are not the words of Eubulus, but of Pollux: and he thought that Midas, and the words that follow, were also throws. ^D There is little doubt that *Eudaimōn* and *harm' hyperballōn podas* were excellent, which, indeed, would surpass other throws by as much as one traveling on foot would be beaten by a chariot; as they say, *pedros*, *odeuōn* beside a Lydian chariot. But *Daknōn* and *Sphallōn* and *ekleipōn*, I think, can deservedly be held as unfortunate. But I return to the Antiochene: for I felt too late that I had wandered far and wide from my purpose, *While we are carried about, captured by the love of single things.*

Page 172. As the most wise Euripides set forth the play poetically, of which these are a small part. Much indeed did Malalas transcribe from *Iphigenia in Tauris*; which it will be useful to examine against Euripides, so that we may know of his doctrine and fidelity: if anyone finds those things so harsh that he might...

be able to devour them. For you will forgive me, who have already begun to be slow and fastidious, if I reject and disdain many things, and glean only whatever is most beautiful. Just ^A like that passage on page 172, in the oracle: *Unless, having crossed the waves of Pontus, you reach the land of Scythia, and the country of Aulis*. But Malalas is wrong, as are all the geographers. I ask you, was it necessary to pass over that Scythian Aulis in silence? What? Shall it lie hidden beyond the bounds of the Cimmerians, covered in a cloud, so that none of you has been able to fix your eyes upon it? Well done, indeed, O John: you were truly born fit to contemplate all hidden and recondite things: so sharp is the keenness of your mind and your eyes!

But, putting aside play, let us seek more serious matters. Even boys know that Euripides taught a twin Iphigenia. John, having learned from someone that the Taurians were Scythians, thought that Aulis—which is a city of Boeotia—was a region bordering upon them. This is what was expressed from those Euripidean lines: ^B *They have come to the Cyanean land*, etc. You see how this Antiochene understood the sentiment of Euripides; as if he had said *in the Cyanean land* conjunctively. I appeal to you again concerning this Cyanean land; you who profess yourselves masters of geography. But why do you mutter? For Cedrenus affirms that John visited those places, as a witness who is altogether *ab ovo*. I condemn, therefore, my own stupidity, I who have until now been putting together *Cyanean* with *Symplegades*. And by Hercules, in all seriousness, that I may hide nothing, this passage does not please me: for I do not see why those cowherds should use the Doric dialect. What, in the name of woe, did they dream that they were Sicilians, not Tauro-Scythians? ^C And yet, however much they were Dorians, if they had used their dialect of *platiasmos* outside the chorus, they would have been sent off at once to even the farthest lands, and not without misfortune. Those who have any taste for these letters know this. Add also that the speech is solecistic, as it is presently held: but certainly, if he spoke for the sane, Euripides wrote thus: *They have come to the land, having fled the flat Cyanean rocks, the two youths*. Or, if you wish to preserve *Cyaneam* for the sake of antiquity, since at the time Malalas lived it had already become obsolete in books; in this way: *Having fled the two-fold rocks of the Cyanean gate, they come to land*.

Just as he speaks later, *Elegantly, however, the Cyanean rock...* as nothing above. ^D Thus Virgil: *As the floods of the Thracian Thermodon*, and Lucretius: *Dusty Ceres, and the Etesian winds of the North*, and again: *As the doctrine of the Chaldeans refuting the Babylonian*, and a third: *That they might drive it with the Magnesian flow of stone*. These two most recent passages must be read thus; in published books they are carried less amended. Page 176, *the seal of the Pelopian race*, he has *olive* upon the shoulder. *Since Clotho took him from the pure cauldron, gleaming with ivory, the shoulder adorned*.

Many other things [43] are related from the same fable in Malalas, which I pass over. For why should I make myself a slave to a delirious master? It is a greater pleasure and profit to know what the highest poet Ennius translated from the former Iphigenia. Julius Rufinianus, on the figures of sentiments and elocution: *Aganactesis*, indignation, which is done by extreme pronunciation. Ennius in the Iphigenia: *Menelaus reproaches me; it remains a regimen for my affairs*. In this, the highest man Ger. Vossius dozed. For if you add one syllable, it becomes a catalectic trochaic. *Menelaus reproaches me: it remains a regimen for my affairs*; which species of verse very fittingly serves for indignation; as I myself long ago observed in the Greek tragedies, before I had learned it from the scholiast of Hermogenes. The same Rufinianus later: *Syncrisis* or *antithesis*, a comparison of things and persons contrary among themselves: as, *I am beaten, because you sin: you err, I am accused for the misdeeds: let Helen return, let the innocent virgin perish: let your wife be reconciled, let my daughter be killed*. Hieronymus Columna, the most learned of the Italians, refers this passage also to the Iphigenia of Ennius; though Vossius is unwilling and resistant, partly because the author is not cited, partly because it is not verse but pedestrian prose; to which he says it is wonderful that Columna did not attend. Let Columna err, and in the verses indeed; but I, since I recognize this offspring of Ennius by certain signs, will not allow it to be found by another than the parent for whom it was born. For they are trochaic verses, from the same stage, in my opinion, from which the superior one is taken: *That I may be beaten, because you sin; you err, I am accused for the misdeeds? Let Helen return, let the innocent virgin perish? Let your wife be reconciled, let my daughter be killed?*

Not more, so far as I know, is Euripides cited by Malalas, except on p. 55: “The Bull from Europe had a son, Minos, just as Euripides the wisest poet wrote in verse; as he says, Zeus having changed himself into a bull snatched Europe,” daughter of the Phoenician, born of the Tyrian Europe and the great Zeus. These things, where they were taken from, I do not certainly know, for it is credible that he attained to these matters in no one tragedy, perhaps in the *Cretans*, where the Chorus speaks to Minos: “O child of the Phoenician, child of the Tyrian Europe and of the great Zeus.” But it is likely that it was taken from the *Phrixus* of Euripides. Eratosthenes in the ^A *Catasterismi*: “The Bull is said to be placed among the stars because he carried Europe from Phoenicia to Crete through the sea,” as Euripides says in the *Phrixus*. “In the times after the fall of Troy, among the Greeks, Themis was first-admired [as a name].” For this man discovered tragic melodies, and first set forth dramas, and after this Minos, and after Minos Auleas organized tragic choruses. And Jubal also conceived of cithara-playing and tragedy for the demonic practices. It signifies cithara-playing and lyre-playing for harmonic practices. And of the Egyptians Pharao—Petissonius, he who is called Pharao by Moses. ^B In the times of Orestes, Themis was admired among the Greeks, who first discovered tragic melodies and first set forth dramas. And after him Minos, and after Minos Auleas established tragic choruses. In the *Stromata*, Clement: the heroic hexameter, that Themis, one of the Titans, found it, but Minos the laws—but as far as pertains to the present business, he dismisses the reader empty and gaping. For what are the laws of Minos to musical modes? No, nor did heroes in tragedies speak heroic hexameters. Therefore, as far as I see, a perpetual anxiety and, as it were, a cross has been established for critics, unless they can drag into the light, from the long night where they are buried, the ^C *Tables* of Callimachus and the *Commentary* of Aristophanes the Grammarian. But alas, you! Will there be any value if I untie this knot? Which I shall certainly do on this law and condition, that from now on no commerce whatsoever should exist between me and your nation. Indeed, by the Antiochene and that fig-tree scholiast, whoever he is, a most serious sin has been committed, both in the names and in the things themselves. Truly, as many words as there are, so many errors. For I do not recognize these fictitious "Theomin," "Minoem," "Auleam," in whose place I ^D replace with unconjectured certainty "Thespis," "Ion," "Aeschylus": nor did Thespis live in that time, for, as a contemporary of Solon, he was very far removed from the Trojan times: nor was Ion prior to Aeschylus: nor did Aeschylus first institute tragic choruses; which, on the contrary:

the chorus, which ^A in perpetual speech before the play sang, he was the first to distinguish by dialogues and persons. But it would be worthwhile to treat all these things more accurately. And concerning Thespis, the doubt is less, because these things are bandied about daily in the lecture halls of students: *Unknown the tragic style, 'tis said, Thespis found, And carried his poems about on wagons,* Suidas: Thespis taught at the first and ... Olympiad. His dramas are remembered, *The Contests of Pelias* or *Phorbas*, *Priests*, *Youths*, *Pentheus*. The name *ependytes* (outer garment) must be taken from the *Laundresses* of Sophocles, "To smooth out the robes, and the linen-washing outer garments"; and Thespis also somewhere says in his *Pentheus*, "Consider that you have the leather-thongs for an outer garment." ... Thespis the tragic poet, through these words, says that something else is signified, writing as follows: *See, I pour for you, to the white knaxzbi,* *Having squeezed it from the milking-pails of the saffron-colored ones;* *See, I have mixed for you with red honey* *The cheese-coagulant, upon your holy altars,* *O two-horned Pan—I place it.* *See, I sing for you the dark-gleaming flame of Bromius.* "Nothing is sacred"—not even the instruction ^B of the children. *Of the childish lines,* *Marpte, sphinx, klops, zynchthëdon.* *Marpte and zynchthëdon.* *Bedy, zamps, chthon, plectron, sphinx.* ... thus it is to be read, not as in the common texts; and by that means the letter μ would be missing, and the ν would be placed twice. However, that *lambda* *labda*, thus the Greek authors seem to have written and pronounced it. So they say, and thus in the most ancient manuscripts, and many similar things. The third, finally, is that of Thespis: *Knaxzbi, chthyptes, phlegmo, dryps*. ^C It is poorly edited in Clement, as will be clearly evident if you wish to count the number of letters with your fingers. How amazingly, however, Clement interprets all these things, however inept and ludicrous they may be, I would prefer you to hear from him himself than from me. These last things are offered a little differently by Hesychius; for he has ... and interprets ... Thus, surely, it is to be read, not ... And induced by the authority of this one, Salmasius wished to change the words of Thespis in this manner: and: But in truth, the authority of Hesychius is not that, nor does it have more weight than that of Clement and Porphyry, men in many parts more learned than he. For the fault of the copyist is not in Clement: nor is there any semblance of truth that the letter χ was fortuitously separated from the word *knaxzbi* and placed in the third verse thereafter. But this is from the manuscript book of Porphyry at Oxford.

49 OF PORPHYRY THE PHILOSOPHER. An interpretation of *Knaxzbi, chthyptes, phlegmo, dryps*. In Delphi, in the temple, there is inscribed a "goat-fish" ^D lying upon a dolphin. For *knax* is the goat, by the elision (lege: *kon*) of the elements of *kox*, and again by the removal (or rather, addition) of the *xi*—for it is called *knakon*, as also Theocritus says in the *Bucolics*—such as a goat and a fish, the one being the burning one, and the other the *dryps*, an appetizer. He says also that the goat is always burning with lust, because if one unfastens its nostrils, it breathes through its horns. He has also another interpretation as follows: That *knaxzbi* is milk, and the *chthyptes* is cheese, *dryps*...

is the fiery essence, *chtho* the earth, and *plectron* is the air, sea, earth, and sun. And some other philosophers and poets have also interpreted this purpose.

"Not far from the beginning, write thus: *knaxzbi*, as Theocritus says in the Bucolics. And he preserves the *enorchan* Libyan *pnakona*, lest he ruin them."

^A It is not necessary for us to say much. For it will immediately be evident that Ion was younger than Aeschylus. Indeed, Socrates was born in the 77th Olympiad, year 4, and was only in his third year of age when Aeschylus departed from this life, specifically in the 81st Olympiad, year 1, in the archonship of Callias at Athens. But against Gyraldus and Scaliger—truly most learned men—Leo Allatius and Johannes Jonsius struggle regarding this Ephesian: the former, relying on insults, and on the fact that Gyraldus was the first to say this without any authority, and that the Ephesian was a rhapsode, not a tragedian; the latter, however, armed with the sharpest of weapons, because the calculation of time contradicts it: namely, that Ion of Chios had been teaching tragedies for no less than twenty years before Socrates was born, and indeed in the 72nd Olympiad. For my part, I have the same opinion, that the Chian and the Ephesian were not one and the same; for the Chian was famous in both lineage and wealth, who, when he had once won at Athens with both a tragedy and a dithyramb, gave a cask of Chian wine to each of the citizens, as Athenaeus and the commentator on the Comic poet in the *Peace* record. Truly, the riches were splendid, which were able to suffice for such extraordinary generosity. The Ephesian was a beggar and a vagabond, seeking his meager living by singing and gesticulating, as was the custom for us rhapsodes; whom his Homer fed with a pittance and hunger. He says of himself in Plato: "For I must be very attentive to them (the audience), so that if I seat them weeping, I myself will laugh, taking money; but if I seat them laughing, I myself will weep, losing money."

I have stated my opinion: certainly, either through a fault in the codex or of memory, "John" is incorrect; and it appears to have been written by the first hand in this manner: "And after this Minos, and after Minos..." That Ion, however, was a tragic poet, Chian by nation, about whom we say more because he is somewhat less known than Thespis and Aeschylus; and because we wish to give a specimen of that work, of which we made mention earlier, in which we wished to collect the *Reliquiae* of all Greek poetry, philosophical, epic, elegiac, dramatic, and lyric. But these have been. At the beginning, however, our Chian is not unjustly mentioned together with Aeschylus, with whom he was once joined in friendship and familiarity; as is evident from Plutarch in the book which is entitled *How one might perceive his own progress in virtue*. Aeschylus, he says, watching a boxing match at the Isthmian games, when the theater shouted out because one of them had been struck, poked Ion of Chios and said: "You see, he says, what training is: the one who was struck remains silent, while the spectators shout." Yet he associated with the old man while he himself was young; and in this, indeed, the error made by John—that he makes Ion older than Aeschylus—is not slight. Would that today the book of Baton of Sinope remained! More and clearer things could be said about the age of Ion; now we are merely traveling along a dark and slippery path, rather than treading cautiously. It is a Dialogue of Plato in which Socrates institutes a discussion with a certain Ion of Ephesus; whom the opinion of Lilius Gyraldus, Julius Scaliger, and Delrio holds is not different from the Chian. ^B And Menagius: which, if it is a true sentiment, there is no need for us to say much.

^C But this is overly delightful, that which follows some time later: that goats, if one closes their nostrils, breathe through their horns. But for "horns" one must most certainly emend to "ears" or "from the ears." Varro, *De re rustica*: Regarding which is that admirable thing, which Archelaus also writes: that goats are accustomed to draw breath not through their nostrils, as other animals do, but through their ears. Pliny and Aelian narrate the same. This Clodius of Naples composed a book against those who would abstain from meat; as Porphyry himself is witness in his *On Abstinence from Animal Food*; nor is anyone else mindful of it, as far as I know. This makes it credible that these things are not shams, but faithfully excerpted from Porphyry.

Moreover, that Ion was a tragic poet, Chian by nation: about whom we say more ^D because he is somewhat less known than Thespis and Aeschylus... [alt-version omitted] ...Chius has achieved a great name in every genre of literature: the Ephesian was learned to sing nothing except Homer, as he confesses of himself; when asked by Socrates whether he knew only Homer, or also Hesiod and Archilochus, he replied: "By no means these, but Homer alone: and that this is enough." And some time later: "When, he says, I pay attention, I am able to contribute something or other," and many other things to this effect. Thus, therefore, I am persuaded that the country, lineage, fortune, talent, studies, and character of that Chian and of the Ephesian were all things, finally, differing, except for the name and the age. And when I speak of age, beware of relegating Ion the Chian to the 72nd Olympiad with Jonsius, Gerardo Vossius, and Menagius, who, being unaware, have fallen into a shameful error. And they have fallen there seriously by a great mischance: deceived by the most futile of men, Emilio Porto, who translated the words of Suidas, "lxxii Olympiad," as if Ion had begun writing in the 72nd Olympiad. And yet, my good man, *lxxii* is 72: and the scholiast of the comic poet exhibits not the numerals, but the whole words. It is therefore easily permissible by age that Ion the Chian had dealings and association with Socrates. Indeed, he himself made mention of Socrates in his own writings. Diogenes Laert.

Laertius and Suidas: the meaning is bad in both places, and in the other *white wing*. ^A Paeans. Hymns, Scolia or convivial songs. Schol. Aristoph. Elegiacs. The same also in Suidas. Athenaeus adduces many verses from the Elegies: as lib. XI, c. 3: "Ion the Chian says, / Let our king rejoice, both savior and father, / And let servants pouring wine mix for us / In silver craters; and let the gold / Keeping wine wash [itself] into the ground; / And each..." And those things which follow: where you may see Casaubon struggling in vain, in order to elicit a fitting meaning from these words; for they need correction before they can be understood by anyone. We shall not be far from the mark if we read it thus: .... Ion the Chian says, / Let the gold keeping wine wash into the ground. Ion on Euripides. / Rejoice, Euripides, among the dark-robed [dead], / In the folds of Pieria, holding your bed of eternal night. / Know, being beneath the earth, that you shall have glory immortal, / Equal to the ever-flowing graces of Homer. Comedies, as the comic scholiasts [say]. Comedy, as in Suidas. Epigrams. The same, scholiast and Anthology of Epigrams, lib. III, c. 26: But the inscription is entirely ^C false and forged: which the calculation of times refutes and rejects. For a wondrous poet is Ion, who celebrated Euripides when dead with an epigram, while he himself had already been extinct for thirteen years! Ion died Olymp. XC, 2, in the twelfth year of the Peloponnesian War. Euripides, however, and Sophocles died in the twenty-sixth year of that war, Olymp. XCII, 3, as is evident from the Frogs of Aristophanes, which were performed in that year at the Dionysia, so that I may omit other arguments occupied by learned men. Therefore in the place of "Ion" perhaps one should write "Iov" or "Bίων" or "Δίων," as anyone pleases. The tragedies are in number XII, as some wish XXX, as others XL, and Suidas. The titles, eleven in number, are still preserved by the ancient grammarians. Agamemnon, the same schol. and Athenaeus. Hesychius: *pedano hypno*, or *pedin kouphō*, Ion, Agamemnon, but some [read] *ou bebaio*. *Hepedanō, kouphō*. Alcmene. ^D And in the Alcmene of Ion, that which was for the preparation of food, has been named *thylakiskē*. That which [was] for the preparation of food has been named *thylakiskos*. Argives. A great drama. *Onotazomenē*, in *Melan-cheton*, in a great drama by men, such as flourishing. *Melanchaitan*, of the great drama. Men *akmazontes* [flourishing] with dark-maned horses. Phrouroi. Phoenix. Ion, however, in the Phoenix [is] clearer: "But, o gods of these gates [celebrating] the revel... a white-winged precursor." This [passage] of Ion is from the Phoenissae or even Oeneus; "If I am correct..." Ion, poet of dithyrambs and songs. He wrote many songs. And Callimachus, in his Choliambics, makes mention of him, because he wrote many things... And the hymn *Aōion*... [The rest of the column contains notes on the collection of Ion's works and his critical reception.]

^A ...to see the life of a man, O citizens." From *Phoenix* or *Caeneus*. "And if I am correct to see the life of a man, O citizens." Ion in *Phoenix* or *Caeneus* or *Phoenix* second. See Hesychius in *Timalphs*. Athenaeus at the end of the book: "In the second *Phoenix* Ion says: 'Leading the heavy *aulos* running in rhythm' [55]... thus speaking to the Phrygian. Running. To strike, leading the heavy *aulos*, running in rhythm... With many bells he struck fear." Teucer. Hesychius: "People, men," Ion in *Teucer*, *Androphontes* (man-slayer), destroyer of the ignorant. *Andreiphontē*, slayer of men—[thus] Meriones equal to Enyalius the man-slayer. *Amphibōtēs*, famous. Ion in *Teucer*. *Peribotos*. *Bōsās*, having cried out. Herodotus. There *Amphibōtēs*. Idem elsewhere. *Amphiōtis*, famous. For you, my Hesychius, one must take care against that "stulticide"; for why should I not return tit for tat, and avenge your barbarity with a word born now at last? *Omphale*. Schol. Aristoph., Harpocration. Hesychius: "We were 'rōpizing' (doing trifles)," Ion in *Omphale*. Some interpreted "wōpizein" as "to be unskilled" and "to be ignorant"—incorrectly. For a *rhōpos* is a light and varied load, and stable, and the braids within the *rhōpa* are baskets made of rushes, and sistra properly.

^B Hesychius: he confuses two words, from which this is formed, the other from *seiein* (to shake) and *sēthein* (to sift). Achreus the ancient tragic poet taught the satyric *Omphale*; of which genre I am thoroughly persuaded this of Ion's also was. Hercules served Omphale, and assiduously sacrificed to Genius and Venus; being ordered to spin wool among the herds of handmaidens, if ever he broke the threads with his hard and unlearned thumb, she would immediately strike his head with her sandal. Nothing here is sad or tragic; all is games and jest. The fragments support this opinion, as many as survive, which promise nothing but banquets, drinking bouts, and symphonies. Hesych. Pollux: "And the black eye-painting stibium." Athenaeus: "There is no wine in the cup... For one must celebrate the festival annually... Let the Lydian *magadis* itself lead the cry." And in the same book, [He says]: "But come, Lydian harp-girls, singers of ancient hymns, adorn the stranger." Ion in *Omphale* having made manifest the gluttony of Hercules, brings on:

^C "By *Euphēmia* (fame/the fair name) he swallowed the good things and the coals." Casaubon tried to correct this to *euphagias* (gluttony). It was not well done. For no one has ever spoken that way; and if he had, it would by no means fit this place, as the second syllable would be short. Nothing better can be devised; everything fits—the likeness, the measure, the meaning. It is pleasing to cite that for the sake of proof as well as for the sake of the good man. And these things indeed I had written about *Omphale*, when Strabo was not at hand. After the opportunity was given to consult him, I was delighted that my opinion was confirmed by his support. The words are [57] in the book *On Islands*, which, formerly clinging to the continent, were later torn away by the intervening sea. Ion regarding Euboea says in *Omphale* (Satyrs):

^D "The thin current of the Euripus separated the Euboean land from the Boeotian shore, cutting [it] off to the Cretan strait." I can say that this passage, Casaubon says, is corrupted; I cannot amend it without the help of codices. But I, aided by no codices, if I shall have restored it to integrity, I deprecate nothing, lest I be torn apart by the toothed papers of critics and canine eloquence. I read, however, thus:

"The thin current of the Euripus separated the Euboean land from the Boeotian shore, cutting off [it] a projecting strait."

Homer Od. ε. "But there were projecting capes, and jagged rocks, and..." And in the hymn to Bacchus:

^A “As it appeared by the shore of the barren sea, on a projecting cape. One-toothed, which neither the sun looks upon with rays, nor the nocturnal moon ever.” And on the *ragitis* [59] (read *ranidos* [drop]) the same author says in *Prometheus*. In *Omphale*, a Satyric drama, [sc. Sophocles] in *Omphale* of the Satyrs. [Concerning] Satyrs: Menedemus of the Satyrs. [In the] *Epidemiae*, [the] *Salamini* of the Satyrs. But now it will suffice for the grammarians, having followed their arrangement, to say something concerning things signified by the *pemphix* (bubble). For it seems that Sophocles speaks of it in relation to breath in *Colchides*: “It turned away [the] *pemphix*... not... of the strait. It turned away [the] *pemphix* [around] the Ionian sea-strait.” “And the deep of the sea, the time to come, shalt thou know clearly, shall be called Ionian, a memorial of thy journey to all mortals, by which thou didst also pass through, casting them beyond the neck of the land, into a deep inner gulf of the Ionian sea.” “A *pemphix* turned [it] away from the light-bearing dawn.” And he himself in *Salaminii* of the Satyrs: “And perhaps one might take the Ceraunian [mountains] with *pemphiges* of thunder and stench.” (Read: “And perhaps one might strike the Ceraunian [mountains] with *pemphiges* of thunder and stench.”) And Aeschylus in *Prometheus Bound* (indeed, *Loosed*): ^B “Walk this straight path: and first you shall come to the Boread blasts, where you must beware of the rumbling storm, lest it snatch you up, twisting you suddenly in a wintry *pemphix*.” And in relation to their rays, Sophocles seems to use the name of *pemphix* in *Colchides* in these verses: “And I wondered here, looking at a golden *pemphix*.” “And I wondered, looking at the distant-viewing *pemphix* golden.” So also Aeschylus: “Neither a *pemphix* of the sun is looked upon, nor the starry mouth of the daughter of Leto.” Aeschylus in *Xantriae*: “Which neither a *pemphix* of the sun is looked upon, nor the starry eye of the daughter of Leto.” However, the torches and [the] *kamax* (pole), Aeschylus has spoken of in *Xantriae*. In *Xantriae*: “And beware, lest the mouth of a *pemphix* strike you; for the exhalations are bitter and not for the sake of life.” And in *Pentheus*: “Nor cast a *pemphix* of blood upon the feet.” And [on the subject] of the cloud, he seems to be set according to this verse in *Salaminii* of the Satyrs in Sophocles: “With a *pemphix* all the sight of the messenger of fire.” “With a *pemphix* all the sight [as] a messenger of fire.” And in Ibycus: “Drinking thick *pemphiges*.” This word is said by him according to a certain comparison of those being caught in a storm (read *epicheim*), ^C wherefore also most of the prognosticators say that *pemphiges* are said of drops during rains. And Callimachus thus: “Not through *pemphiges*... they drive the spring.” And Euphorion thus: “He said that *pemphiges* grind down the dead flowers.” “If fluttering, fluttering *pemphiges* grind down the dead.” I.e., they seem to lament with their murmur. One might also read, as regards *Salaminii* of the Satyrs, for the sake of which we have corrected the rest—may no one lead me to believe that a word is void of meaning. Aeschylus indeed made [it], or [the] Sophoclean play, which was inscribed with that title, no one else remembers. I would dare say for certain that the reading is “In *Salmonius* of the Satyrs.” Hesychius twice: [in] *Salmonius*.

“Four-horsed chariot entered here, and shaking a torch, He rode through the Greek peoples, and through the midst of the city of Elis, Exulting, and was asking for himself the honor of a god, Madman! who [dared] to imitate the clouds and the inimitable lightning Of the sky, and with the beat of hoofed horses.”

So far, indeed, the argument is suited to the Satyrs and befitting a cheerful and festive day. To which also those fragments seem to pertain; which words are of someone who wittily and urbanely mocks that comical ape of the Thunderer: ^D “Perhaps also he may strike the Ceraunia With the foul odor and force of the lightning’s flash.” And [60] that other [fragment]: “Veiling with a cloud the face of the messenger of thunder.”

And thus far Sophocles proceeded in that play: for what follows is clearly tragic, and to be bewailed in a lamentable poem. [...] “But the almighty father from among the dense clouds [hurled] the missile (Not those torches, nor smokey lights of the Tadis [sic]), and drove him headlong with an immense whirlwind.” And these things indeed rest upon probable conjecture: yet Athenaeus in Book XI establishes the matter beyond controversy: [index: entries preserved]

^A regarding the chattering of the kottabos-players, which I propose: “And for him who struck the bronze target.”

Creophylus and the Policy of the Tenth Book

“And she, having conceived, Stratonice of the beautiful belt Bore Eurytus in the halls, a most beloved son.” And his sons were born: Deion and Clytius, And Texeus the godlike, and Iphitus, son of Ares. And after them she bore the youngest, fair-haired Iole, To Antiope the queen, of the ancient stock of Aubolidas.

But Creophylus says two; Aristocrates says three: Toxeus, Clytius, and Deion. Antiope. Clytius and Iphitus are the sons of Antiope. An ancient line of Pylon: “Antiope the queen, of the ancient stock of Pylon the Naubolide. And to her, then, came the offspring of divine Danaus, Naublius, for he was the son of Clytonius the Naubolide, Naubolus the son of Lergus.” ^C Creophylus, *Capture of Oechalia*, [Policy]... “And the mighty Heracles answered him further.” A similar locution is in those verses which we produced above on another occasion; nor is there need that we summon more witnesses. There are some who refer the *Capture of Oechalia* to Homer, as the author Callimachus declares in Strabo and Sextus: “I am the labor of the Samian, to whom divine Homer once gave shelter; I weep for Eurytus and all he suffered, and for fair Iole; and I am called a Homeric composition; a great thing this, Zeus friend, for Creophylus.” Suidas in *Homer*. And other poems are referred to him: *Amazonia*, *Little Iliad*, *Nostoi*, *Epikichlides*, *Oechalia* (or *Iambs*), and *Capture of Sicily*. But for *Sicily*, one must read *Oechalia* without any doubt. I will add that also, which, if I know my Mill well, you would have taken it grievously that it was omitted: namely, that *Hethiepactos* is a word of nothing, and somewhat further down it is written thus: *Heptapacion*, and he says he composed *Epikichlides*. ^D At first sight that conjecture seemed true, namely, that I remembered there were seven Epigonoi, and that they were ascribed to the number of Homeric poems. Herodotus IV: “But matters regarding the Hyperboreans are spoken of in Hesiod, and also in Homer in the *Epigonoi*, if indeed Homer truly composed those verses.” But I immediately rejected that opinion when I noticed that the *Epigonoi* are not senarii, but hexameters. The *Writer of the Contest of Homer and Hesiod*: “But Homer, having failed in the victory, while wandering about, recited his poems: first, the *Thebaid*, seven thousand verses, of which the beginning is: ‘Sing, goddess, of thirsty Argos, where the lords…’” Then, being in a hurry, he says the *Epigonoi*, seven thousand verses, of which the beginning is: “Now again, let us begin from younger men, O Muses.”

^A Others attribute both the *Thebaid* and the *Epigonoi* to Antimachus of Colophon. Regarding the former, the matter is commonplace: for these I have as witness the Scholiast on Aristophanes, *ad Pacem*: “Now again let us begin from younger men” — scholium: “The beginning of the *Epigonoi* of Antimachus.” He wrote thirteen books [as a] memorial: the *Margites*, and the *Aigae*, and the *Battle of the Mice*. He also writes the battle of the *Epigonoi*, and the *Thebaid*. The *Oechalia*, the *Kerkopes* [concerning] the Gods, and [his] *Hymns*. Also the *Heptaepaktion* and the *Epikiklidai*, and many *Epigrams* together with the *Nymphic Hymns*, and the *Odyssey* itself along with the *Iliad*.

Regarding the *Heptaepaktion* and the *Epikiklidai*: the last word is presented not only by Suidas, but also by Herodotus and Athenaeus (books II and XIV). Furthermore, that passage in Suidas ought to be corrected toward this example: and for *hepiepaktos* it seems one should write *heptaepaktos*, i. e. the "seven-pronged one." For the ζ denotes seven. So in Hesychius: read *enneaetês*, i. e., nine-year-old, because θ signifies nine, and with a word added between it, *ennês* [means] wise, true, good, ancestral. Librarians, to save labor, write *pēr* for *patēr*, and for *patrōios*, *prōios*, *praos*. See Hesychius on *Enēs*. Regarding the notion of the *Heptaepaktion*, and to touch upon that as well: it is very easy to invent many things: yet, I think, those who would assume that Homer was playing in that booklet about certain men seven in number, who on the shore were curing their bodies with food or sleep, or doing something else jokey and ridiculous, will arrive nearest to the truth. Homer himself in the *Certamen* with Hesiod: “to take a meal on the shore with looting men.” And in the *Odyssey*: “And he found him sitting on the shore.”

^B It is not a dithyramb, lest you drink water. And he wrote also [books] in prose, and *Epigrams*, and a work in prose called *Presbeutikon* [the Embassy]. He wrote scholia, and elegies, and the piece in prose called the *Presbeutikon*, which some consider to be a complete work, [though] not by him. There is also his *Ktisis* [Foundation], and the *Kosmologikos*, and commentaries, and certain other things. His *Foundation of Chios* is also extant. Ionians call spears *lonchas*, [as in] Ion in the *Acquisition of Chios*: “To make spears from the spear of Teos.” Ion in the *Foundation of Chios*. Regarding this *Crasis* [mixture], the poet Ion says in his *On Chios* that the seer Palamedes, having found it, prophesied that there would be a voyage for the Greeks drinking three parts to one. Does he [not] mean that the bird-seer Palamedes… *Epidemiai*. Ion the poet then writes thus in the books inscribed *Epidemiai* [Visits]: “I met the poet Sophocles in Chios, when he was sailing to Lesbos as a general…” ^C if it seems very [likely], removing, nearer, was doing, director, was viewed in the appearance. ^D And thus, having taken him up, they sailed out, and they are on the shore; the fishermen indeed turned themselves to their work, but Homer remained the night on the beach. And having sailed with some of the locals, he was carried off to Ios; and they anchored not by the city, but on the shore. Ion the poet, therefore, says in those writings of his composed without meter and in prose, that fortune is a most unlike thing to wisdom, [though] being the creator of most like things. And he wrote a comedy and epigrams.

^A ... of his, but he was great, / With a thick and hairy head/covering. And Ion records also the speech by which he especially stirred the Athenians (Cimon), exhorting them not to permit Greece to be lame, nor the city to be yoked unequally.

Not to permit Greece to be lame, / Nor the city to be yoked unequally.

^B Cosmology. This man wrote on meteors and composed speeches. Distortedly: "And do not pity me / Nor soothe me with false myths, for I say / That composing speeches is a most disgraceful disease." ... "And the dithyramb-teachers regarding the meteors and clouds say many things, and they used to make complex words and say 'airy-nebulous-wanderers'; such was Ion the Chian, the poet." Tragodoumena. Ion. Isocrates in *On the Antidosis*: "The orator might now recall Ion, the tragic poet, who was Chian by birth, the son of Orthomenes, ^C surnamed Xuthus. He also wrote many songs and tragedies, and a philosophical treatise titled *Triagmos*, which Callimachus says is contradicted by some as [being the work] of Epigenes." In some places it is even titled in the plural, *Triagmoi*, as Demetrius of Scepsis and Apollonides of Nicaea [affirm]. They record in it these things: "The beginning of my speech is all things three, and more than this; more [or] less than these three, one of each is a trinity of excellence: prudence, and power, and fortune." ^D As D[emetrius] the S[cepsian] and A[pollonides] the N[icaean] [say]. They record, however, to write "Euenos." Two Euenoses are recorded as poets of elegies, homonymous to one another; just as Eratosthenes [mentions] in [his book] *On Chronographies*. And this speech Callimachus recorded in the *Register of Rhetoricians*, xv: [As for] Chaerephon, also an author [whose book] Callimachus records in the *Table of Miscellaneous Writings*, writing thus: "Whoever wrote [on] dinners. Chaerephon to Cyrebion." Then next he gave the beginning: "Since you have written to me many times." 105 lines. And that the Cyrebion [mentioned there] is a parasite has been said before. Chairephon to Cyrebion: "Since you have written to me many times,"

^A Chairephon, Cyrebion, Auleas the most wise,

Concerning the Tragmou

the most wise of Endymion, whom the moon lulled to sleep on the mountain of Caria, in order to kiss him while he was sleeping. I suspect that here also Aeschylus is meant, who in the fable of the *Carians* or *Europa* could not fail to touch upon that story. But how far from the truth is it that Aeschylus is said to have been the first to institute tragic choruses? On the contrary, the parts of the chorus, before Aeschylus composed his tragedies, were twice as long as they were afterward. But this matter cannot be explained in a few words: almost the entire condition of the stage and history must be illustrated: many passages of the authors must be corrected, others newly interpreted: many errors must be removed, [which have already] become hoary and venerable by their very antiquity. For no one among the cohort of scholars who have labored so hard on this subject has yet been able to know what Thespis, what Aeschylus, and [what] Sophocles added to these inventions. And so, you may patiently dispense with such an odious dispute for the present; indeed, I fear that you might read this letter even without such a contentious and overly talkative [passage]. As for me, I am weary of both the delay and the absurdities.

^A ...would be the words, which is the opinion of Athenaeus; but [those] of Cyrebion. But I am astonished that this prologue was corrected by learned men; who, although they dissemble and mutter, understand it according to that [meaning], as if they had stumbled upon Ovid’s *Getica*. By my authority, read it thus: Where the individual words indeed are common; however, he who does not perceive the Ionian character and form of speech from the style itself, perceives nothing. But concerning Epigenes, I do not know where to turn, so great is the difficulty of the matter on both sides. For behold, Suidas tells you: who makes not Epigenes, but Orpheus, the author. And when I see that Epigenes made the commentary on Orpheus, [which is] mentioned by Clement (Proclus however, in *Timaeus* book V, praises Pythagoras himself as the author of this, whence it is certain that, like other Pythagorean writings, it was composed in the Doric dialect) and v. etc. Reading this, I say, I am almost brought to the opinion that Harpocration wrote [this] regarding this example: on the other hand, where it comes to mind that mention was made of Orpheus himself and also of Pythagoras in those *Tragmou*, I immediately cast that opinion aside and convict Suidas of a manifest error. Clement and Diogenes Laertius, from which it is certain that Suidas wrongly took the words of one or the other: and it is more stable to defend the received reading of Harpocration as safe and sound. Indeed, as I suspect, the books of Epigenes were carried bound together with the writings of Ion, for he had made a commentary on the *Tragedies* of Ion; which you may know from Athenaeus, book XI, ch. 5, so that it is no wonder if the copyists, who disturb and mix everything up, wrote them, some as Ion's, others as Epigenes'.

Pag. 181. And after Minos, Auleas composed tragic choruses of dramas. It may perhaps seem very strange, most learned Mili, that that dark figure Auleas is called by John instead of Aeschylus. But what is there to marvel at, when one keeps in memory so many other hallucinations of this man? Even p. 73, citing...

Pag. 214. What are you saying? Our opinion has surely deceived us, who believed that you were born at Antioch. If indeed the author is Lucian, the Antiochenes could have judged best of all concerning dancers; but we see that you are most unskilled, as much in this art as in all others. I ask you, you most sluggish of men, have you never read the sacred Scriptures? Is there not there frequent mention of dancing, long and long before Stesichorus was born? What? Have you not even caught a glimpse of Homer through a lattice? You may therefore listen to him now: "Dancing, and singing, which are offerings to the god. For to one, god gave deeds of war, To another dancing, to another the lyre and song." I know, however, what spurred you to fraud, namely the name of Stesichorus, as if he were the first to set up choruses; and certain poems of Bacchylides, which are inscribed, and are cited by Stobaeus and Athenaeus, book... A passage somewhat more intact is in Dionysius of Halicarnassus: "All [are] Cretic except for one foot which is dissolved into a paean; so that, when I read this passage, I seem to see the dancers with my own eyes and [see them] leaping." However, Bacchylides is not the prince and inventor of the *hyporchemas*; but, as it seems to some, Pindar; as others wish, Xenodamus. See Clement, Athenaeus, and Plutarch *On Music*.

Pag. 155. And yet, Malala, so far is this Glaucus from having been wise, that his name has passed into the usage of a proverb, concerning a man such as you are.

^A *Gold for bronze, and hundred-oxen for nine-oxen.* But [71] I would rather believe this to be a blunder of the copyists (especially if you had not repeated that same passage), and that the speech ought to be continued according to this example: Aeneas of the beautiful beard, the grey-eyed, wise, pious. I recognize the pious Aeneas; and thus Isaac Porphyrogenitus plainly [reads it].

That remark on page 329, *And Simon went down to the marketplace and made a noise*, the translator renders in accord with Hellenism, certainly, but not aptly with regard to the sense. What if we interpret *ephophese*, as it is said in the N.T. concerning Judas Iscariot, *crepuit medius* (burst asunder)? Hesychius: *Elachen, ephphesen*; and *Lalein*, to make a noise. But the translator certainly dozed off on that page, as in a long and unpleasant work sleep can easily creep over one. *Achaia, Pelene, which is also called the Peloponnese.* I beg you, has anyone ever heard this even by hearsay? Write *Achaia, Pellene*, and translate: *Achaea, Pellene, and what is called the Peloponnese*. *Pellene* is a city of Achaea. Consult the geographers. Apollonius *Argonautica* 1:

I fear it might be tedious to note that *Buttios, Bottios, Bottios* is wrongly written in Malalas for *Bruttios*, or *Brettios*. This is indeed well-ascertained; since George and Jerome bring forward the very same narration from Brutius. Thus on page 200, *Thales and Castor and Thallus* are mangled instead of *Thallus, Castor, and Polybius*. For, in similar fashion, Syncellus cites together from him Castor, Thallus, and Polybius concerning Assyrian affairs. And furthermore on page 121, Callimachus instead of *Aitia*. For they are not inscribed in that way, lest anyone should err, but as in the epigram in *Anthologia*, book 1, chapter 67:

I appeal to the judgment of more elegant men, whether our reading by conjecture is not somewhat better:

*Aitios, the writer of the Aitia, Callimachus.* Otherwise [72] the man most truly a brother to Malalas, Fulgentius Planciades, says *Jentaculum* means a morning snack. Callimachus *Intesia*: *To offer a jentaculum to Jove.* You would say that he sought this from those mutual *Etesia* of John. But that would seem incredible, that the Cyrenaean should speak in Latin and indeed in verse: for thus I read. *To offer a jentaculum to Jove...* But it diminishes my wonder that Fulgentius should have seen books of Mnaseas' *Europiaka* and the Philippics of Demosthenes written in the Latin tongue. Even as the ancient narrator of Ovid’s *Ibis* attributes the most wretched verses, and those Latin ones, to Eupolis and (the jocu- ^B lar confidence of the man!) to Democritus.

That remark furthermore on page 52, *As Dimarchos the most wise wrote concerning the same Dionysus*, is incorrectly presented in place of *Dinarchus*. For George, recounting the same history, says *Dinarchus*, not *rhetor*. Regarding whom learned men have held diverse opinions. The words of Demetrius of Magnesia in his work *On Homonyms* in Dionysius Halicarnassensis: *We have encountered four [men named Dinarchus], of whom one is from the Attic orators; another has gathered the mythologies concerning Crete; a third is older than both of these, a Delian by birth, having treated of this as epic, that as deed; a fourth is he who composed the discourse on Homer.* And Gerard Vossius in his famed work *De Historicis*: *Dinarchus*, he says, *a Delian, gathered the Cretan fables, as we know from Dionysius Halic.* The same man seems to be indicated by Eusebius, where, speaking of the deeds of Bacchus, he says, "As ^C the poet Dinarchus says, not the orator." We grant him the *amartēma mnēmonikon* (lapse of memory). For he was not a Delian collector of Cretan fables, but this second person, I know not whom; whom it is difficult to believe to have published them in verse, at least this is not ascertained. Scaliger in the Greek of Eusebius p. 31. *Let the learned see*, he says, *whether the third of the Dinarchi, a Delian by birth, having treated of this as epic, that as deed, is that poet whom Eusebius hints at.* For he is indeed unknown to me. Thus far I concede, that he is either the poet concerning whom Eusebius speaks, or none of the four. But I ask, what is intended by that *pragma* (deed)? For as far as I see, no sense or knowledge underlies it. In Latin you should translate it thus: *Dinarchus, a Delian by birth, who said something, and did something [73]; or, who said something in verse, and did something in reality.* Certainly, we have not lost much in Demetrius, if he said everything thus. But I think no one will deny that by a convenient mutation both his honor and the sense can be restored to the speech, if we read: *having treated of this as epic, that as gramma* (writing), that is, he who wrote certain things in heroic verse, and other things in prose: or (because *gramma* sometimes signifies any kind of writing), *toūto de drama*, he who published both heroic poems and dramas.

This *chronographos* Domninus can be known from nowhere but Malalas, by whom he is very often called to account. You will discover by most certain signs that he was an Antiochene, when it shall be permitted at leisure to consult those passages: you might also probably say that he deduced the history from the beginning of the world down to the times of Justinian. Therefore, my mind inclines to believe that this was that Domninus who was bishop of the Church of Antioch at that time. For indeed, just as he is called *Domnus* by John on page 265, so these people call that patriarch *Domnus*, those *Domninus*. ^D Added to this is the fact that nearly all who have attempted to describe the times were bishops: Victor, Prosper, Theophilus, Eusebius, and Georgius, bishop-designate.

Indeed, I do not know which brings greater wonder, that so many proper names of men were corrupted by John, or that those errors were dissimulated by the learned translator and passed over in silence: for example, p. 101 and 171, *Tondarios* for

Tondarius* for Tydareus; *Androges* for Androgeus; *Pleisione* for Pleione; *Iobates* for Iobates. ^A *Mediam* the daughter of Aetetes for *Medeam* the daughter of Aeetes; *Pelops* and *Pelopos* for *Pelops* and *Pelopos*; *Amphiona* for *Amphion*; *Aeniades* for *Aenidae*; *Iocaste* for *Iocaste*; *Eteocleous* for *Eteocleous*; *Amriarus* for *Amphiaraus*. Deucalion the son of *Elenus* for *Hellenus* of *Picus*—read *Hellen*. *Antiphanten* for *Antiphaten*; *Telephu* the king of the Latins for *Telemachus*, whose son is Ulysses and Penelope, the other son of Hercules and Auge. By the similarity of the two words, the whole basis of history is perturbed. But aside from this, greater errors exist by ^B any standard of faith [74] on p. 135, where he recounts the leaders of the Greeks who took up arms against the Trojans. For, to say nothing of the number of the ships—though that ratio is by far the most faulty—behold Homer: *Menelaus* and *Leistus*, for *Peneleos* and *Leitus*.

Of the Boeotians, Peneleus and Leitus were the leaders,

And they who held Dulichium and the sacred Echinian

And they who held Arcadia and the steep mountain of Cyllene,

Of these was leader the dear son of Admetus, of eleven ships,

And Nireus from Syme brought three equal ships.

And they who held Tricca and craggy Ithome,

Now surely those as many as inhabited the Pelasgic

And they who held Nisyros and Crapathus and Casus,

There were Chthonia and Heliopē the long-eyed,

Where I would willingly read so that they might be compared against each other. I know now what you turn over in your mind: but I can confirm to you that the first syllable of the word is produced and long. The first to restore it was Henricus S.

[773] I have made this conjecture, as much as I from the thing itself can surmise. The old editions represent *harmonië ge merōpis*. Therefore, here also it must be read *harmonië themerōpis*. *Themerōpis*, lovely, throttling. Lovely harmony, lovely shame. "And [773B] from my eyes it struck the lovely shame." *Aidōs* is shame. *Meinousan tēn ōpa*. *Thermōpis* is a part. But to be *thermerynesthai* and *kichlidian* are comic; *chlidik* to *chladian*, *themerynesthai* and *chlidān*, *chloidan*, *kyloidian*. *Themeron*, solemn, from which also comes *semnynesthai*, *themerynesthai*. *Themerē*, firm, solemn, stable. *Themerophrónas*, prudent, temperate.

LETTER OF RICHARD BENTLEY.

I had decided to put an end to this Epistle here: but my friend intervened, demanding a reason for the nagging in my ears, why Joannes Malelas is called by me [774] Malela, who by both the Vossii, by Ussher, and by all others who have mentioned him to this very day, is named Malela. But I say, I would not swear by the words even of the greatest men [78] — but I depart to another opinion, where it is convenient, although unwillingly, by my own right. Let someone ask, therefore, why he should rather be called Malela? This, of course, they would receive as an answer from those who do: that he is so named in Constantine, and in Damascene, and is nowhere else commemorated, except in Tzetzes. But if the matter stands so, you will find it commonly and everywhere, yet not for that reason is he called the grammarian Suidas, or the apostle Thomas, or the Aristeas of the LXXII interpreters. The logic of the Greek language, clearly, would hardly or in no way endure that masculine names in the nominative case should end in the letter A. And that is the reason why foreign men's names, which end in A, are inflected by the Greeks into AS. But if it is by now so fully established that the Greek nominative is ΜΑΛΕΛΑΣ, I would not—translating into Latin—want to cast off the final letter, contrary to the custom and usage of those times in which the honor and grace of the Latin language highly flourished. The older writers, indeed, as Quintilian bears witness (book I, chap. 5), did not rashly endure Greek masculine names to end in the letters A or S in the nominative case. And thus, too, we read in Caelius: *Pelia Cincinnatus*; and in Messalla: *Benefecit Euthia*; and in Cicero: *Hermagora*: so we should not wonder that by most of the ancients it was said *Aenea* and *Anchisa*. Priscian, book V: "Among the Greeks ending in AS, among us they terminate in A; as *Mapovas*, *Marsya*, *Sosia*, *Byrrhia*, *Chærea*, *Turia*, *Bagrada*." But books VI, p. [774] and 701, he says that this happens frequently and is wont to occur. And perhaps those on the opposite side may think they can defend themselves by these authorities. But to me it seems far otherwise: but one must not argue about this cause dryly, or as if in passing, but fully and copiously. In the beginning, there is no controversy that the native speech of the Latins had no nominative in AS with the genitive *Isoulabō*. Wherefore of old, whether some Greek lived in the Latin state, or Greek writings were turned into Latin, it pleased them to write and pronounce such names mostly by A [79]. And this, indeed, was done by them from the genius and custom of the vernacular tongue. The comic poets, therefore, in interpreting Greek, held to that method; *Chærea*, *Sosia*, *Byrrhia*, *Plania*, *Clinia*, *Demea*, *Phædria*—bringing these forward. Doubtless those were given to the ears of the common people. Nor yet were those ancient memories lacking (by the leave of Quin-

^{A B C D}

^Atalian—I fear he may have used a corrupt codex). For truly all the manuscripts that survive today steadfastly hold *Hermagoras*. But it is better to take a test of judgment from the very passages, as in the first book *De inventione*: "Of this constitution Hermagoras is thought to be the inventor"; and in the same place: "But if Hermagoras had had great skill in these matters." Put back here for a moment *Hermagora inventor* and *Hermagora habuisset*; do you not feel the clashing of the vowels yawning wide? For my part, I would not believe that Cicero had written it so, even if Cicero himself claimed it. What shall I say of the writers of the Augustan age? What of those of subsequent ages? Surely the same custom prevailed at that time, so that Greek names would fall into the form of ^B Latin. I hope you will trust me in this; I need not enumerate here an infinite number of examples. This, however, I would have said with an exception: that although learned men observed the custom I have mentioned, yet for the names of slaves, or whoever else, as I said at the beginning, lived in the Latin community, 81 popular usage, with whom the right of speech resides, usually changed them to the Latin custom. Hence it is that we have "Phania, the freedman of Appius" in Cicero. For the master would have "Hellenized" in vain, when he was called *Phania* by all his fellow-slaves and acquaintances without the letter. But *Phanias* the natural philosopher is mentioned by Pliny; for he had lived his life in Greece, and had had no master or patron in Rome. Then there is that saying of Horace: "Let the Jew Apella believe it," that is, any Jew—so that I may explain the passage, little understood in this memory. The Jews lived across the Tiber, and for the most part were freedmen, as Philo confesses in his *Legation to Gaius*. Moreover, *Apella* is a name among freedmen, frequent enough in ancient inscriptions. Cic. Epist. 25, Book V: "Do not tell it even to your freedman Apella." And so, "Let the Jew Apella believe it," as if you were to say, "Let some superstitious Jew from across the Tiber believe it." Then there is that other phrase, "Marsya must be approached," in the way Ovid, Silius, and Lucan also speak. Marsyas, appearing in the forum and endowed as it were with Roman citizenship, could not but be on the lips of the crowd daily; and besides, there were Phrygian slaves by that name. On an ancient marble [we find]: M. HELVIUS M. L. MARSYA. But here the poets have gladly followed the authority of the common people, since according to Greek pronunciation *Marsyas* would not stand in a hexameter. Thus, there is Cassius Chaerea, tribune of the plebs, most famous for the slaughter of Gaius Caesar; another, a sculptor, is mentioned by Pliny, who, I believe, had never seen Italy; and a third, an Athenian who wrote on agriculture, is mentioned by Varro as *Chaereas*. Thus Persius (before Cornutus the Stoic had changed the line for fear of Nero) has: "He has the ass's ears of King Midas"; and after that example, Justin: "for no other reason than that this name was frequently given to slaves, especially those bought from Phrygia." Terence, in the *Phormio*: "A boy, Midas, met me." An ancient stone in Sponius, p. 289: MIDA CUBICULARIUS. Nor can I guess by conjecture why those who

refer to Perdiccas, with Curtius, Justin, and others, name him as Perdicca. Indeed, among both, all other names are pronounced in the Greek manner: Amynias, Bagoas, Philotas, Ophellas, Jollas, Gobryas, Alcetas, brother of Perdiccas. 82 I do not recall Perdiccas among the slaves or freedmen of the Italians: nor can I find any other cause. For the cognomens of freedmen (these were their names before they were manumitted), if they ended in -as in Greek, generally assumed a Latin termination. However, I have noticed from ancient inscriptions that this custom did not prevail everywhere. For behold, here for you are these names from Gruter, Reinesius, and Sponius. ᾿Αχιλλᾶς: M. Cornelius Achillas. L. Pontius Achilas. ᾿Αλεξᾶς, a diminutive from ᾿Αλέξανδρος: Q. Hortensius, Q. L. Alexa. Suarettius Alexa. ᾿Ανδρέας: ^B C. Quinctius Andreas. ᾿Απελλᾶς (Apollas in Athenaeus) from ᾿Απολλόδωρος: T. Claudius Apella. ῾Αρποκρᾶς from ῾Αρποκράτης or ῾Αρποκρατίων: M. Lollius Arpocras. C. Herennius Harpocra. ᾿Αρτεμᾶς from ᾿Αρτεμίδωρος: C. Cæcilius Artemas. Cæcilius Dexter and Artimas brothers. Æ. Fl. Artema. L. Laberius Artemas. ᾿Αθηναγόρας: Vircius Athenagoras. Κλεόπας, in the New Testament, or perhaps Κλεοπᾶς from Κλεόπατρος or Κλεόφιλος: Ti. Cleuphas. Κλεινίας or Κλινίας: Juli. Clinias. Q. Pomp. Clinias. Κτησίας: M. Aur. Clesias. Just as Dama among the Persians, if it is Greek, comes from Δαμᾶς or Δαμᾶς, which is a diminutive from Δημήτριος: Mettius Damas. ᾿Επαφρᾶς from ᾿Επαφρόδιτος: G. Avillius Epaphra. M. Cornelius Epaphra. C. Curtius Epaphra. C. Julius Epaphra. P. Nonius Epaphra. C. Pricilius Epaphra. S. Propertius Epaphra. C. Veincus, C. L. Epaphra. And conversely, Epaphras performed the last office. Γλαυκίας: Glaucias Lib. Γοργίας: Gorgias Lib. L. Abuccius Gorgia. Spon. 288. ^C ῾Ηρᾶς from ῾Ηρόδωρος: L. Abuccius Hera. M. Petronius Heras. P. Sulpicius Hera. P. Valerius Hera. ῾Ηρακλᾶς from ῾Ηρακλεόδωρος: Clem. Stromat. v. L. Æmilius Heracla. C. Annius Heracla. C. Camelius Heracla. L. Clodius Heracla. L. Cornificius Heracla. Q. Cornelius Heracla. L. Creperius Heracla. L. Licinius Heracla. F. Longinus Heracla. C. Stiminius Heracla. Q. Petinius, Q. L. Heraclas. Ἑρμᾶς from ῾Ερμόδωρος: Herma, conveyancer. L. Æmilius Hermas. P. Annius Herma. C. Cassius Herma. Cornelius Hernia (vitiated for Herma). M. Junius Hernia (read Herma). Q. Lullius Herma. M. Mag. Herma. Octavius Herma. C. Quinctius Herma. P. Statius Herma. P. Turannius Herma. Q. Vibius Herma. M. Ulpius Aug. Lib. Herma. 83 ῾Ερμαγόρας: L. Mæcius, L. F. Hermagoras. ῾Ερμίας: Aurelius Hermias Aug. Lib. T. Didius Hermias. M. Helvius Hermias. C. Julius Hermia. Sex. Pompeius Sex. Hermia. Spon. 221, read Sex. L. Her. Λεοντᾶς, perhaps a diminutive from Λεόντιος: L. Arcius Leontas. C. Julius Leontas. M. Herennius M. L. Leonta. Λεωνᾶς: Artemidorus p. 249. Λεωνᾶς the Syrian and Lauste. Fabius Leonas. C. Oppius C. L. Leonas. ^A Mηνᾶς from Mηνόδωρος. D. Lallius Mena. Mητρᾶς from Mητρόδωρος. C. Fyrmius Metras. Nικίας: M. Annius Nicia. Cluvius A. L. Nicia. A. Plautius Nicia. Nικήτας: Aur. Niceta. Ὀνησᾶς from Ὀνησίφορος: Q. Virius Onesas. Παπίας: C. Marcius C. F. Papia. Munatius Papa (whether corrupted from Papia, or from Πάπας). M. Plutius M. L. Papia. C. Purellius Papia. L. Valerius Papia. Φιλώτας: A. Annius Philotas. Φιλᾶς from Φιλόδημος: M. Hirrius, Phila. Φιλέας: L. Magius Phileas. Φανίας: Phania, in Terence and Cicero: Fl. Phaneas. M. Tillius M. L. Phanias. Θευδᾶς or Θεοδᾶς from Θεόδωρος: A. Fæsonius Thuda. Q. Veionius Teuda. Θεωνᾶς: Bishop of Alexandria, Theonas, in St. Jerome. Livius Theona Aug. L. and Livius Theona ab Epistulis Græc. Ζαβδᾶς: ^B on the monument of L. Valerii: Saufeius Sabda. Ζηνᾶς from Ζηνόδωρος: L. Calpurnius Zena. But in fact, I should like now to ask those who pronounce Malela without the S, by what authority they learned that this John of Antioch was abducted, a captive, to Italy, and served in servitude there; but finally, after he had received his freedom, betook himself to writing history? But if so, why, I pray, do they prefer to speak with the mother of Evander and those "old ones who smell of garlic," or with the dregs of Romulus, rather than with Cicero and the good authors of Latinity? To me, indeed, it is not a long deliberation which I would prefer to imitate. But perhaps this is too zealously and anxiously done: except that it was absolutely necessary to answer those by whom I was provoked. For Gerard Vossius, who I know not if he was led into error by the translator of Damascenus, certainly paved the way to error for others by his own example and authority, not with certain judgment, but appears to have acted inconsiderately and contrary to custom. For he who never otherwise 84 dropped the S: not even when he had authors whom he might, even if perversely, have at least to some extent imitated. According to whom the historian is called Chæreas, and the writer of the Macedonian and Delphic deeds, Marsyas, is called Apellas: and yet Chærea and Clinia in comedy, nor the Marsya and Apella of Horace, could escape his remarkably tenacious memory.

I had scarcely written these things, most pleasant Milli, when behold, a new and unforeseen thing is announced to me, which has almost cast me down from the position of my opinion. For truly, that which I was laboring so much to prove in the previous argument, was nothing; and I had shot completely wide of the mark in that discussion. For among Constantine and Damascenus, the name of Malalas can be indeclinable: nor is it contrary to the usage of the Greeks that barbarian names should be produced without variation of cases, as τοῦ ᾿Αμμοῦν, τὸν ᾿Ανούβ, τοῦ ᾿Ακούμ, τοῦ Βλάχ, τοῦ ᾿Ἄχαβ, etc., and that there are six hundred masculine nouns in -A, such as ὁ Σισάρα, ὁ Σάλα, ὁ Φουά, ὁ Σιθ in the Old Testament, ὁ Ζαρέ, ὁ ᾿Αβία in the New: that the nation of the Syrians (and this Malalas is a Syrian) loves names ending in the letter A, such as Maruta, Barsoma, and almost all others: thus also the Arabs as well

^A of the Roman general, and 203, in accordance with Sounikas and Simmas • 111, with the charioteer Calliope • 165, with the phylarch Arethas • plain as it is in Constantine, he is surnamed Malalas. Is it our pleasure, then, that we take John himself as our arbiter? It is a just proposal, I think, and an honest one. He himself shows his opinion on p. 204: “Sounikas and Simmas • 110, a certain Calliopas the charioteer • 166, Arethas the phylarch and Gnous...” If they still doubt whether, if they can, it is at all possible that anyone who wrote this ^B was called Malalas. Now, Sisaras and Phouas, how unwillingly and reluctantly are they brought into the argument! It was, indeed, rightly done by the LXXII men; since they were committing those ancient and Ogygian names to Greek letters, Abdalia, Mashalla, Taphala, and if there are any others, they expressed them according to the syllable of the barbarian language. For as for those who had departed from life many years before, there was, I believe, no custom for them with the Greeks. But if other younger men, who had the same names as those ancients, had use of and commerce with the Greeks, their names were undoubtedly declined according to the norm of the Greek language. Thus in I Paralip. cap. VIII, there is a certain Ananias, and in cap. XII, Berchia, or, as it is in the Royal ms., Barachias. The same names occur in the New Testament (for the Syrian interpreter renders it here and there as Hhananio, Brachio): yet with a Greek ending, Ananias, Barachias. Similarly, those ancient Iacob, Ioseph, Saoul are ^C constantly named: but the younger men, who had dealings with the Greeks, would even have been called by the example of Sisaras and Salas and Phouas; if they had lived at Antioch or in any other Greek city, and had committed the memory of their deeds to writing. I do not, however, deny that the names of Syrians and Arabs frequently end in the letter A: I deny that such a termination was preserved by the Greeks. Abdalia, Masalla, Taphala. Thus, indeed, the Arabs. But how do the Greeks? Theophanes, p. 294: “Mohammed, son of Abdela.” I am lost, indeed, it ends in A, and makes against me. But I do not wish to cast them into joy in vain. For that very inconveniently intervenes in the same place: “Abdela the son,” and in Zonaras ^D and in Malalas... My opinion is the same regarding Syriac names. Porphyry in Eusebius, [edited by] Scaliger: “Ptolemy, being indignant that Demetrius had attacked Pelusium, as he was in possession of Egyptian affairs, sends the King of Asia, Alexander, as the son of Alexander, who, owing to his being a ‘purchased’ man of Ptolemy, was surnamed by the Syrians Zebinas, Alexander called Zebinas.” And Josephus: the Bishop of Antioch of the same name is called Zebennus by Nicephorus, and Zebenus by Eusebius and Jerome. Now, agorastos, “purchased,” is in Syriac Zbino or Zbina. But if you were to speak in Greek [87], John the Antiochene, who because he was a scholar (philologos) was called Malalas by the Syrians, or, as it more closely follows the pronunciation of the Syrians, the Damascene himself, a Syrian, calls him Malalas.

Nam Malolo or Malala is an orator, eloquent, garrulous. It is not difficult to conjecture for which reason Joannes gained that surname, ^A *αλεῖν ἄριστος, ἀδυνατώτατος λέγειν*. Porphyry himself was called Malchus or Malcha by his fellow Syrians; but in Greek, not *Μάλχα*, but *Μάλχος*. Thus *Cipha* is the rock *Κηφᾶς*, *Thoma* the twin *Θωμᾶς*, and whatever others there are. Malal. p. 41: *Ἀντίοχον τὸν ἐπίκλην Κούζωνα*. It would be a wonder if, according to their opinion, the surname of Antiochus was *Chusona* in the nominative case, as *Malala*: since both are Antiochenes. What then is the meaning of those things on p. 65: *Ἀντίοχον τὸν Κούζωνα τὸν ἔγγονον Ἀντιόχου τοῦ Σούζωνος*? But if we ought to imitate and express Syrian names everywhere, why, I pray, is he called *Ἰωάννης*, and not *Ἰωάννῃ Μαλᾶλα*? For in Syrian it is *Juchanan*, as with the LXXII men, *Ἰωάνναν*. But behold for you Cantacuzenus, who on p. 874 says, *Λατίνων τις, Ἰωάννης Περάλτα προσαγορευόμενος*. You should know, however, into what straits they are brought when they adopt as patrons of their cause men who were born in the fourteenth century after Christ, ^B a time when barbarism was already inveterate. A truly refined and humorous affair. This John of Antioch can well be called *Malela* in Greek, because a certain Italian had the name Giovanni Peralta. For thus Cantacuzenus p. 174: *Μάλιστα δὲ Ντζιουάν Περάλτα ὁ τούτων ἡγεμών*. That Greek is the current vernacular: thus *giostra* becomes *τζουστρα*, *gingiva* *τζιντζίβα*, *jecur* *ντζηγάριον*. Bah! How I wish they would proceed further and at the same time prove that *Ντζιουάν Μαλάλα* ought to be said: they would have committed a truly great and memorable crime. But that is indeed harsh, which is found in Theophanes: *Ἰωάννης ὁ ἐπίκλην Ἡμοῦλα*. Nor is he called *Hemula* only by Victor, but also by Anastasius, who converted Theophanes into Latin, and by Liberatus the Deacon, *Joannes Mela*; unless perhaps the codices are corrupted. Of the Greek writers, only Theophanes, and only once, makes mention of his surname; by others he is simply called John, ^C by the Patriarch Nicephorus, by Nicephorus Callistus; just as by Leontius of Byzantium, and in the *Chronicon Orientale*. For which reason I am the more led to believe that that word is corrupt; and that that apex [sign], which in manuscript books is accustomed to signify the termination -ας, was changed or omitted by a careless scribe. Especially since I see all names of this genus, except this one, written by Theophanes himself with -ας; *Ἀρέθας*, *Ἀττίλας*, *Μασάλμας*, *Ἀδουλάδας*, *Κουτζίνας*, and many others. Therefore, in this place, as is my opinion, an injury was done to Theophanes. Nor should the fact that Anastasius and Victor call him *Hemula* in Latin, not *Hemulas*, move anyone more than the fact that *Attila* is called so by the Latins, who to the Greeks is *Ἀττίλας*. For Greeks and Latins did not receive such foreign names from each other, but both received them from the Barbarians themselves. ^D Therefore Priscian strayed utterly from the truth when he thought that *Turia* and *Bagrada* (these are rivers of Africa) were declined from *Τουρίας* and *Βαγράδας*. From the Greeks indeed *Ἰόβας*, *Μικίψας* and *Βάρκας* are said, which by the Latins are Juba, Micipsa, Barca. And yet these names which I have just mentioned were not sought from Greece; but were carried into Italy by a direct route from Africa. For indeed, when they bring forward *Ἀμίλκας*, *Ἀννίβας*, they produce Hamilcar and Hannibal; is this not sign enough from where both were fetched? Surely these were keeping masculine African names in -A willingly; the ears of the Greeks rejected them as discordant and inharmonious. But even if I concede that that *Ἡμοῦλα* originated from Theophanes: I would not wish to take any monk as a master of language against the authority of all; but rather that he himself composed it according to the example of his nation, and I add also his own. Eustathius, Bishop of Thessalonica, a man endowed with a manifold abundance of learning, disputing accurately about those Homeric *ἱππήλατα Πηλεΰς* and *Ἑμείας ἀκάκητα*, etc., does not call *Σισάρα* and *Σάλα*, nor *Ἡμοῦλα* to aid his cause; for how could he [have meant] Giovanni Peralta, before he was born? Which on the contrary stands against this, that he mentions only two masculine Greek names in -A from the whole of memory, and those not coined by himself, but by the trust of Eudaemon of Pelusium; I believe of him whose book on Orthography Stephanus Byzantius, and Suidas, and the writer of the *Etymologicum* cite. That one of these is an Illyrian name, [is evident] from a certain epigram, *Πατὴρ δ' ἔμ' ἔφυσε κόπαινα*, that is *Κοπαίνης*: the other, a Syracusan one, from Sophron, *ὁ Μύριλλα*. Namely, Democopus the architect, when he had built a theater at Syracuse, had distributed ointment to the people individually, and from that event came to be called by the surname Myrilla: namely *ἀπὸ τοῦ μύρου Μύριλλα*. I, however, bid that Eudaemon to eat *κρόμμυα* [onions], to punish the man with misfortune: since it was a religious taboo for the Pelusians to taste onions. For truly, of the dialect of the Syracusans of tomorrow, I believe nothing today. Theocritus the Syracusan, who used the vernacular idiom constantly (*Μοῦσαν δ' ὀθνείην οὔποτ' ἐφεικυσάμην*), does he not preserve the Σ everywhere, *Δαποίτας*, *Μενάλκας*, *Ἀμύντας*, *Διοκλείδας*? Was not Apollo *Δαφνίτας* worshipped at Syracuse? Is not Micetas the Syracusan philosopher praised by Cicero in the *Academica*? Is not *γαγάρας*, an earthworm, in their language in the *Etymologicum*? I do not conceal that it is written in Hesychius as *Γαγάτα*, *σκώληξ*: but indeed with a double error. For the Σ letter dropped out, as is accustomed to happen in usage when another immediately follows: but the T is very easily changed into Γ, as elsewhere *Στένυτρον*, *εὐρυπωδέστερον*, *συριγγώδες*, for *Στενυγρόν*, *εὐριπῶδες*, *στενόν*, *συριγγῶδες*. Nor did Sophron himself speak otherwise. Athenaeus lib. VII: *Καὶ παρὰ Σώφρονι ὁ θυννοθήρας*, and *καρχαρίας* somewhat further below, p. 306, *Σώφρων*, *Θυννοθηραία δὲ γαστὴρ καρχαρίας ὁ κάτινος δῆσθε*. Read the former words which were causing trouble to Casaubon thus: *Σώφρων Θυννοθήρας*. *Ἇ δὲ γαστὴρ*, that is, *Θυννοθήρα*. Surely that book is inscribed *Θυννοθήρας*. *Etymol.* in *Ἦκα*: *Ὡς φησὶ Σώφρων ἐν Θυννοθήρᾳ*. Badly elsewhere *ἐν θυννοθήραις*. But if that about Democopus is true, the surname of the common people...

appears to have been obtained, because perhaps at that time at Syracuse the name Myrilla was not unknown for some prostitute. Indeed, some poet, I know not whom, among the Lyricists, makes us more certain that this is the proper name of a woman (H. Stephani): Stratocles, friend of Cytheres; Stratocles, friend of Myrilla. Behold the dear woman, she blooms, she shines. A rose rules over the flowers, a rose among girls, Myrilla. As far as *Copaena* is concerned, although I do not easily give it credence, the author of the epigram may see to that word; who perhaps, because he introduced a barbarian Illyrian speaking gibberish, may seem to have composed a well-mannered poem. And if anyone [90] wishes to bring forward John Malalas by the example of the Illyrians: that is just the same as if someone were to contend that Cato spoke Greek like Cicero; because among Aristophanes there is a song of the Carians, *Βρεττανελὸ τὸν Κύκλωπα*—and the Attic elegance of that Scythian: *Ὡς ἐλαπρὸς ὥσπερ ψύλλο κατὰ τὸ κώδιο. Ὦ γρᾴδι᾽ ὡς καρίεντό σοι τὸ τυγάτριο, Κοὐ δύσκολ᾽ ἀλλὰ πρᾶο· ποῦ τὸ γρᾴδιο.* But I have detained you, my Milli, too long in this litigious dispute. You will, however, grant pardon to necessity; for afterwards, as far as I am concerned, others may speak as they wish; I certainly do not envy them, nor do I intervene. Indeed, I have written these things very unwillingly, *ὡς οὐχ ὑπάρχων, ἀλλὰ τιμωρούμενος.*

ADDENDA

Behold, Crispinus again. For since a little bit of paper still remains, as the printer says; to spare it, as he says, would be foolish clemency. I will therefore run through the whole Epistle, noting from time to time if anything needs either to be retracted or corrected more diligently.

In the beginning, it is indeed well done that I refrained from inquiring (p. 4) about the etymology of *Ἠρικεπαίου*. For although *Ἠρι-* is not infrequent in the composition of Greek words—*Ἠριπόλη*, *ἠριγένεια*, *ἠριγέρων*, *ἠριθαλές*—nonetheless, I think I have certainly discovered that it is a foreign word. For the *κεπ* syllable, which you might rightly wonder at, is clearly alien and discordant from the custom of both the Greek and Latin language. *Σκεπ* indeed occurs in *σκέπω*, *περισκεπής*, *σκέπαρνον*, etc., but *κεπ* never occurs, as far as I know, except in *Κέπφος*. I barely doubt that this word, since it is solitary and unique, was once pronounced *Keffos*, not *Kepfos*, just as today we say *Σαπφώ* (Sappho), not *Sapfo*. Among the Latins, however, you would seek the *κεπ* syllable in vain. *Conceptio*, *perceptio*, and similar words have a long *cep* from *percepi*, *concepi*. *Anceps*, *auceps*, *princeps* exhibit *cep* in writing, not *κεπ*: nor indeed do they make their oblique cases *aucepis* or *princepis*.

Ep. p. 12. [91] That I may lash my own vines, I falsely believed those three plays of Sophocles were from one tetralogy, led to that opinion by the continuation and sequence of the history. *Ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πεσών γε ἐκείμην*. For the fault discovered the next day could have been easily rectified, if the printer had allowed it. *Ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν προτετύχθαι ἐάσομεν ἀχνύμενοί περ*. It is certain that those tragedies were published at a long interval. They say the *Antigone* was so well-received that for that reason a praetorship was decreed to Sophocles in the war against the Samians. Therefore it seems to have been acted in year 111, Olymp. LXXXIV, in the 56th year of the age of Sophocles, according to Mar^Bmor Arundell. But *Oedipus the Tyrant* won second place and was defeated by Philocles: indeed, it even preceded the *Oedipus at Colonus*, which he wrote in extreme old age, the latest of all, at the time of publication. The argument of *Oed. Tyr.*: *Εἰσὶ δέ τινες οἱ Πρότερον αὐτὸν, οὐ Τύραννον ἐπιγράφοντες, διὰ τοὺς χρόνους τῶν διδασκαλιῶν καὶ διὰ τὰ πράγματα*. That passage, which the great Camerarius did not understand well enough, should be written thus. There are those who inscribe this play *Oedipus the Prior*, not *Oedipus the Tyrant*: because it was prior both in the time of the action and in the sequence of events. That is the meaning of this passage.

Ep. p. 14, vers. 3. Clemens himself in the *Protrepticus* strongly increases our suspicion, who, after he produced those verses as if they were Sophoclean, says: *Ὁ τοσοῦτος μὲν, ἤδη καὶ παρακεκινδυνευμένος ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῖς θεαταῖς παρεισήγαγεν*. Therefore, by the judgment of Clemens, anyone who had once brought them onto the stage would have come into danger of his life. They are cited elsewhere by this example:

*θνητοὶ δὲ πουλυκερδείᾳ πλανώμενοι* *ἱδρυσάμεσθα πημάτων παραψυχήν,* *θεῶν ἀγάλματ᾽ ἐκ λίθων τε καὶ ξύλων* *ἢ χρυσοτεύκτων ἢ λ'ἐφαντίνων τύπους.*

Therefore, because there is now no room for our censure regarding *πολλὸν* and *χαλκέων*, I must bring forward other arguments as to why they are supposititious. The word *πουλυκερδείᾳ* certainly does not please on many accounts. For what, I ask, does *πουλὺ* do in the dialogue of a tragedy? It is from the Ionic dialect. Nor can a spondee be borne in the [92] fourth seat against the custom and usage of the Tragedians. Theocritus: *Καὶ φιλοκερδείῃ βεβλαμμένου ἄνδρα παρελθεῖν*. Nor furthermore can you accept *πουλυκερδεία* as avarice with the interpreter of Clemens: for that meaning is indeed altogether inept and tasteless, as if men were thrown into error by prudence or cunning. For *πολυκέρδεια* is *πολυτροπία* like the Homeric Ulysses:

^A *for it is not to be said, with much knowledge of mind, but he himself was urged on by endless wiles.* There is also another reading, no better: *Many mortals wandering in heart.* For my part, saving the judgment of others, this seems to be said too meagerly for the elegance of Attic honey. But however it may seem to the learned regarding this matter, I would wish to ask those who clearly know Greek whether *καρδίᾳ πλανώμενοι* is a sincere and pure Greek idiom, or rather a foreign one, and a product of the evil spirit? Truly that Jewish sore has betrayed itself by its own mark. For it is not Hellenism, but a pure, unalloyed Hebraism translated and expressed from Holy Scripture. Psalm xcv (and Epistle to the Hebrews): *They always wander in their heart; and they themselves did not know my ways.* Isaiah lix: *My heart wanders.* ^B Truly we deny that these things could proceed from a Greek man, let alone from Sophocles. *Τύπος* in this place is the statue itself, not the form of the statue, for the *τύποι* must necessarily be with those among whom they are placed. The Greeks would say: *gold-wrought* or *ivory-wrought* types of gods, rather than *χρυσοτεύκτων*. Just as they say *bronze* images of the Olympians, not *bronze-wrought*. Artemidorus says: *For bronze images of free men are set up.* This is held generally and commonly, such that indeed to use it as a testimony would be most foul. Nor do the Latins act otherwise. Lucretius: *If the images of youths through the houses are not golden, they are not of golden kind.* Pliny xxxiv, 7: *Figures of the gods rather of wood or clay.* Juvenal: *The golden effigy of the sacred monkey shines.* Horace: *What shall I say of the way in which a fire more abundant in the waxen image has burned.* ^C Therefore, *types* of ivory-wrought gods is nothing less than a Greek phrase: yet the Sibyl uses it in book iii, saying for *wooden* gods, *wooden* idols. *Whoever by no empty deceptions, nor work of men, / Golden and bronze, and of silver and of ivory, / And of wooden and stone gods have fashioned idols, / Made of clay, smeared with minium, of mimic painting, / Honor them, as many as mortals do with witless counsel.* Clement’s *Protrepticus* contains the same. Who then will deny that in the same game there are those who have forged these Oracles, and that fictitious Hecataeus? ^D But if I shall have proven regarding the verses falsely attributed to Sophocles, this also will most evidently be established, which once Philo Herennius and in the memory of our fathers Jos. Scaliger suspected: namely, that that book *On the Jews*, which used to circulate under the name of Hecataeus, had been forged by some Jewish Hellenist: just like that Aristeas, a work of similar villainy, whom many others after the same Scaliger convict of being supposititious, among whom most learnedly and copiously is Humphry Hody, to whom ecclesiastical history will one day owe much. Ep. p. 33. *Εὐηρότατον*. Suidas in the Lexicon: *Εὐπρότατον* is that which has good land, the best of the earth. *Εὐήρατον* is that which is well plowed. *Εὐηρότατον*... [alt-version omitted] *So he spoke; and he went down to the high-roofed chamber of his father / Wide, where gold and bronze lay / And clothing in chests, and enough fragrant oil. / And Helen stood by the chests, / Where the garments were of many colors; which she herself had wrought.* Possess also, and much more appositely to the name of the *Tragedy*, to restore, *Lavato*, etc. [index: entries preserved]

^A Lycas form *Aeneæ*, *Pythagoræ*, *Lycæ*. When, in our reasoning, names that end in E in the genitive conclude in A in the nominative—as *Catilinæ*, *Catilina*. But these are Greek, and therefore they retain the letter S in the nominative. Some, however, lose the letter S in the nominative, as *Nicæa*, *Nedaa*. Therefore, in these nominatives, custom must be observed. Where it should be read, *Nicia* and *Demea*. See Epistle, page 83.

Ep. p. 75, v. 35. But nowhere else is that interchange of vowels [95] so frequent among themselves as in two manuscripts, the most ancient ones: one, the Alexandrian, in the Royal Library, which exhibits the complete Bible and the Epistles of St. Clement to the Corinthians; and the other, the Cambridge manuscript, though mutilated and curtailed, since it contains only the Acts and the Gospels; but the same one, side-by-side, shows the ancient Latin translation, expressed word-for-word from the Greek, truly most worthy to be brought forth at last from oblivion and darkness into the light. Also, the Acts of the Apostles are preserved at Oxford, of equal antiquity indeed, but with a version much different; and finally, in France, the Epistles of St. Paul, which codex is, in antiquity and Latin version, and even in the form of the Scripture and the book, most similar and twin-like to our Cambridge one. And these very specimens, along with all others everywhere in the world that we know of, since they long, long precede in dignity and time, and nothing like or second to them survives today, they struggle (alas!) with moths and mice; and even if fires have spared them, they will without a doubt perish from mere old age within a few years. You, however, most learned Mill, who of all mortals are most engaged in this study, you will not allow this praise to be snatched from you, but will hasten to rescue those venerable pledges and monuments of antiquity from neglect and decay. For we know that you are preparing an edition of all these, which would present in one page and at a single view the Alexandrian codex, which leads the family, and the Cambridge one with its version, and where this is deficient, the Oxford one, and following that, the Gallic: an edition which would accurately and religiously follow the individual letters and strokes of the manuscripts, even where there is error by the scribes. No mottled or discordant purple will be sewn onto it; no punctuations, no marks of accents, the entire system of which today is preposterous and perverse: so much so that he who has acquired your edition for himself might seem to turn over with his hands and possess with his eyes those very archetypes themselves. This undertaking, as is a certain prophecy, will one day be the splendor of our Britain and the protection of the Church: and will compensate your labors with most ample rewards [96] and immortal glory. Be successful in this piety and diligence. Toward you we turn all faces and eyes; you alone we call to this course: the codices themselves implore and demand your speedy help: why do you hesitate to enter in, amidst the praises and the applause of those who favor you, with favorable rumor? You, indeed, as I can promise concerning you, will do this diligently; as soon as the New ^C Testament of yours comes out, now brought almost to the end; in which work, unless I feared to praise you to your face, I would say with how long an interval you have left behind the labors of all others in this genre. Such is the elegance and magnificence of the type; such learning shines forth in the annotations, such industry in the various readings: for indeed, to prepare such an abundance, you have curiously examined all the writings of the Holy Fathers, all the ancient versions, and an infinite number of manuscripts. Indeed, certain unskilled men, devoid of any use of good letters, from time to time stir my stomach, who judge all the labor that is expended in collecting various readings to be either useless or dangerous to the Church. Their talk, although they are unworthy that ^B any account be taken of it, I will refute with one example in the present: whereby it will be clear that certain minute, and at first glance very light, things can resolve great difficulties. The passage is c. iv in the Epistle to the Galatians, which has exercised most learned men from the very beginning of Christianity almost to this day: 22. *Γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι ᾿Αβραὰμ δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν· ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης, καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας.* 23. *᾿Αλλ’ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης, κατὰ σάρκα γεγέννηται· ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας, διὰ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας.* 24. *῞Ατινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα· αὗται γάρ εἰσιν αἱ δύο διαθῆκαι· μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ, εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα, ἥτις ἐστὶν ᾿Αγάρ.* 25. *Τὸ γὰρ ᾿Αγὰρ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Αραβίᾳ, συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἱερουσαλήμ, δουλεύει δὲ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς.* I remember indeed, Mill, that not long ago, having been asked by you to interpose my judgment on this most difficult passage, I vehemently approved your opinion, which you put in that edition of yours. For neither has the same mountain been called both Agar and Sinai, nor indeed has there been any place anywhere among the nations noted by that name, nor furthermore could Agar the bondwoman (if anyone prefers to take it of a bondwoman [97] rather than of a mountain) in the same allegory correspond both to the mountain and to the law which was promulgated from the mountain; and for these reasons, different conclusions have been reached by the ancients, some of whom removed ^D *Σινᾶ*, but more removed *Τὸ γὰρ ᾿Αγὰρ* from the books: those things, however, which men of greatness have commented upon in our memory and that of the Fathers are so far from making the passage more clear that they involve it in new obscurities. On this very occasion, lest I should be entirely *ἀσύμβολος* (contributor-less/empty), I brought forward, as you know, an extemporaneous conjecture, which even then seemed to approach very closely to the truth. Namely, that someone had once noted in the margin of the word *Σινᾶ*, for the sake of explanation: *Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Αραβίᾳ* (Sinai is a mountain in Arabia), this Sinai which the Apostle mentions is a mountain of Arabia; but those words, not much later, as often happens in common usage, slipped from the margin of the book into the speech itself: for indeed they are not the Apostle's, but *παρεμβεβλημένα* (interpolated), as can be known from the very face and color and the thread of the whole body of text itself, and that therefore I am prepared...

to remove this passage, unless it appeared otherwise to you. But since you were strongly inclined to favor my conjecture, I say: if this opinion—or rather this suspicion of ours—is true, it is necessary that the word which closely follows *systoichei* be removed as superfluous. No sooner said than done; we inspected your edition and found there that at least four manuscripts do not recognize that conjunction; which is certainly not for nothing, nor can any convenient reason be given why it should have been absent if the words in question had always existed in the codices. That such a point should be revealed by so slight an indication sufficiently refutes ^A the little words of ignorant or malevolent men, who follow this diligence, which seeks out varieties of Scripture, as if it were obscure, anxious, and excessive, and adduce it for blame. For who would doubt that the sense becomes much better and clearer if, on the authority of the manuscripts, the *de* is expunged; then *autem Sina oros estin en te Arabia* are removed from the middle; and the whole passage is then read as follows: "Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Hagar. And Hagar correspondeth to the Jerusalem which now is, for she serveth with her children." That is: Agar corresponds to Jerusalem, for they serve with their progeny. I ordered the *gar* and *de* to be swapped between them on the authority of the Alexandrian manuscript and others; furthermore, I intentionally said "Hierosolyma" and not "Jerusalem," so that it might be clear from the very diction to what that *douleuei* refers. For the sense itself demands that *douleuei* be referred to *Ierousalem*. Since this is so, why, my dear ^B man, does it appear necessary that the Apostle used such a construction of words, that *douleuei* must necessarily agree with "Hagar"? Or for what reason did he place *to Hagar* in the neuter gender, as if Hagar were used here materially and for the word, and not for the handmaid? Thus far, I think, my conjecture has proceeded successfully, so that this mountain of Arabia seems to need to be moved from its place with every engine; but these scruples worry me, nor have I anything else to say or conjecture, except that from the time these words were introduced from the margin into the text of the discourse, just as certain men intruded the conjunction *de*, so they also lightly changed some other things and adapted them to that fictitious sense. For I am easily persuaded, truly, to believe that Saint Paul wrote in this way: ^C *Te de Hagar systoichei te nyn Ierousalem, douleuei gar meta teknon autes. He de ano, etc.* That is: *Agar corresponds to Jerusalem, for she serveth with her children. But the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.* But afterwards this adulterine [reading] insinuated itself by this example, *Te de Hagar Sina oros estin en te Arabia systoichei te nyn Ierousalem.* But when this text, as you see, falls into a manifest solecism, it is certainly likely, not to say necessary, that these words *de* and *to* were changed by the scribes in a short time, just as they are commonly cited today. For who would not accuse the ignorance of the copyists and the carelessness of the bookmen, to use the words of Saint Jerome, who write not what they find, but what they understand, and while they strive to correct others' ^D errors, they display their own? Farewell.

THE YEAR OF THE LORD DCLXXV.

SAINT ANDREAS OF JERUSALEM, ARCHBISHOP OF CRETE. NOTICE.

Andreas was born in Damascus, as far as we are informed by the Synaxaries, the Great Canon, and the Triodia of the Greeks. He lived at Jerusalem as a monk, not as a bishop. For which reason in the Catenae and elsewhere he is sometimes termed "of Jerusalem" (1). Afterwards he was called to Constantinople, became a deacon, and took care of the orphanage. Subsequently, he was designated Archbishop of Crete. One must see what Combetisius wrote about him (2). There is no agreement among the learned concerning his age. Cave says he flourished around the year of Christ 653 and long after: because in the Synaxarion or Triodion he is said to be a supplicant to Sophronius the patriarch, who died his final day in the year 639. This, however, pleased neither Papebrochius (3), nor Casimir Oudin, who contends that he extended his life